


w*pm 



i 1 -^:- :•/':«;= 






• ■ '•' ■•...- 



Ifcfc 












I 

t LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, t 

$ . 

♦ i 

j UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. { 

9 



$ _ — , — , — w _ — . m 

MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



IN DEFENCE Off 



THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY, 



AND IN PAYOR OP THE 



RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION OF THE YOUNG. 



DELIVERED IN THE 



SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 



February 10, 1844, 



IN THE CASE OF STEPHEN GIRARD'S WILL. 



WASHINGTON : 

PRINTED BY GALES AND BEATON. 

1844. 



&_ _ ___: ^ 



MR. WEBSTER'S SPEECH 



IS DEFENCE OF 



THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY, 



AND IN FAVOR OF THE 



RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION OF THE YOUNG 



DELIVERED IN THE 



SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 



February 10, 1844, 



IN THE CASE OF STEPHEN CIRARD'S WILL 



WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED BY SALES AND SEATON. 

1844. 

1- 



-£ 



J«ort 



XfJ^ 



CORRESPONDENCE 



Washington, February 13, 1844. 
Sir i Enclosed is a copy of certain proceedings of a meeting held in reference 
to your argument in the Supreme Court in the case arising out of the late Mr. 
Girard's will. In communicating to you the request contained in the second reso- 
lution, we take leave to express our earnest hope that you may find it convenient 
to comply with that request. 

We are; sir, with high consideration^ yours, very respectfully, 
P. R. FENDALL, ^ 

HORACE STRINGFELLOW, 
JOSHUA N. DANFORTH, 
R. R. GURLEY, 
WILLIAM RUGGLES, YCcrmmtttee. 

JOEL S. BACON, 
THOMAS SEWALL, 
WILLIAM B. EDWARDS, J 
Hon. Daniel Webster. 



At a meeting of a number of citizens, belonging to different religious denomina- 
tions, of Washington and its vicinity, convened to consider the expediency of pro- 
curing the publication of so much of Mr. Webster's argument before the Supreme 
Court of the United States, in the case of Francois F. Vidal et al, appellants, vs. 
the Mayor, &c, of Philadelphia, and Stephen Girard's executors, as relates to that 
part of Mr. Girard's will which excludes ministers of religion from any station or 
duty in the college directed by the testator to be founded, and denies to them the 
right of visiting said college — the object of the meeting haying been stated by 
Professor Sewall in a few appropriate remarks, the Hon. Henry L. Ellsworth was 
elected chairman, and the Rev. Isaac S. Tinsley secretary. 

Whereupon it was, on motion, unanimously resolved — 

1st. That, in the opinion of this meeting, the powerful and eloquent argument 
of Mr. Webster, on the before-mentioned clause of Mr. Girard's will, demonstrates 
the vital importance of Christianity to the success of our free institutions, and it3 
necessity as the basis of all useful moral education ; and that the general diffusion 
of that argument among the people of the United States is a matter of deep public 
interest. 

2d. That a committee of eight persons, of the several Christian denominations 
represented in this meeting, be appointed to wait on Mr. Webster, and, in th6 
name and on behalf of this meeting, to request him to prepare for the press the 



portion referred to of his argument in the Girard case ; and, should he consent to 
do so, to cause it to be speedily published and extensively disseminated. 

The following gentlemen were appointed the committee under the second reso- 
lution : Philip R. Fendall, Esq., Rev. Horace Stringfellow, Rev. Joshua N. Dan- 
forth, Rev. R. Randolph Gurley, Professor William Ruggles, Rev. President J. S. 
Bacon, Doctor Thomas Sewall, Rev. William B. Edwards. 

The meeting then adjourned. 



H. L. ELLSWORTH, Chairman. 



Isaac S. Ti>sley, Secretary. 



Washington, February 13, 1844. 
Gentlemen : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communica- 
tion. Gentlemen connected with the public press have, I believe, reported my 
speech in the case arising under Mr. Girard's will. I will look over the report of 
that part of it to which you refer, so far as to see that it is free from material errors, 
but I have not leisure so to revise it as to give it the form of a careful -or regular 
composition. 

I am, gentlemen, with very true regard, your obedient servant, 

DANIEL WEBSTER. 
To Messrs. P. R. Fendall. 

Horace Stringfellow = 

Joshua N. Danforth 

R. R. Gureet. 

William Ruggles 

Thomas Sewall. 

William B. Edwards. 



Socrates. Ifj then, you wish public measures to be right and noble, virtue 
must be given by you to the citizens. 

Alcibiades. How could any one deny that ? 

Socrates. Virtue, therefore, is that which is to be first possessed, both by you 
and by every other person who would have direction and care, not only for himself 
and things dear to himself, but for the State and things dear to the State. 

Alcibiades. You speak truly. 

Socrates. To act justly and wisely ^ (both you and the State,) you must act 

ACCORDING TO THE WILL OF GoD. 

Alcibiades. It is so. [Plato, in Alcibiades, 

"Sic igitur hoc a principio persuasum civibus, dominos esse omnium rerum ac 
moderatores, Deos." — Cicero de Legibus. 

" We shall never be such fools as to call in an enemy to the substance of any 
system, to supply its defects, or to perfect its construction. " 

"If our religious tenets should ever want a further elucidation, We shall not call 
on Atheism to explain them. We shall not light up our temple from that unhal- 
lowed fire." 

" We know, and it is our pride to know, that man is, by his constitution, a 
religious animal." — Burke. 



SPEECH. 



May it please your Honors : 

It is not necessary for me to narrate, in detail, the numerous 
provisions in Mr. Girard's will. This has already been re- 
peatedly done by other counsel, and I shall content myself 
with stating and considering those parts only which are im- 
mediately involved in the decision of this cause. The will 
is drawn with apparent care and method, and is regularly 
divided into clauses. The first nineteen clauses contain vari- 
ous devises and legacies to relatives, other private individuals, 
and to public bodies. 

By the 20th clause the whole residue of his estate, real and 
personal, is devised and bequeathed to the " mayor, aldermen, 
and citizens of Philadelphia/' in trust for the several uses to 
be after mentioned and declared. 

The 21st clause contains the devise or bequest to the college, 
in these words : 

" And so far as regards the residue of my personal estate in trust, as to two 
millions of dollars, part thereof, to apply and expend so much of that sum as may 
be necessary in erecting, as soon as practicably may be, in the centre of my square 
of ground, between High and Chestnut streets, and Eleventh and Twelfth streets, 
in the city of Philadelphia, (which square of ground I hereby devote for the pur- 
pose hereinafter stated, and for no other, forever, ) a permanent college, with suita- 
ble out-buildings, sufficiently spacious for the residence and accommodation of at 
least three hundred scholars, and the requisite teachers and other persons necessary 
in such an institution as I direct to be established, and in supplying the said 
college and out-buildings with decent and suitable furniture, as well as books, and 
all things needful to carry into effect my general design." 

The testator then proceeds to direct that the college shall be 
constructed of the most durable materials, avoiding needless 
ornament, and attending chiefly to the strength, convenience, 
and neatness of the whole ; and gives directions, very much in 
detail, respecting the form of the building, and the size and 



8 

fashion of the rooms. The whole square, he directs, shall be 
enclosed with a solid wall, at least fourteen inches thick and 
ten feet high, capped with marble, and guarded with irons 
on the top, so as to prevent persons from getting over; and 
there are to be two places of entrance into the square, with 
two gates at each, one opening inward and the other outward, 
those opening inward to be of iron, and those opening outward 
to be of wood work, lined with sheet iron. 

The testator then proceeds to state his directions respecting 
the institution, laying down his plan and objects in several 
articles. The third article is in these words : 

"3. As many poor white male orphans, between the ages of six and ten years, 
as the said income shall be adequate to maintain, shall be introduced into the col- 
lege as soon as possible ; and from time to time, as there may be vacancies, or as 
increased ability from income may warrant, others shall be introduced. " 

The fifth direction is as follows : 

" 5. No orphan should be admitted until the guardians, or directors of the poor, 
or a proper guardian or other competent authority, shall have given, by indenture, 
relinquishment, or otherwise, adequate power to the mayor, aldermen, and citizens 
of Philadelphia, or to directors or others by them appointed, to enforce, in re- 
lation to each orphan, every proper restraint, and to prevent relations or others from 
interfering with or withdrawing such orphan from the institution." 

By the sixth article, or direction, preference is to be given, 
first, to orphans born in Philadelphia; second, to those born in 
other parts of Pennsylvania ; third, to those born in the city 
of New York ; and, lastly, to those born in the city of New 
Orleans. 

By the seventh, it is declared that the orphans shall be lodg- 
ed, fed, and clothed, in the college ; that they shall be instruct- 
ed in the various branches of a sound education, comprehend- 
ing reading, writing, grammar, arithmetic, geography, naviga- 
tion, surveying, practical mathematics, astronomy; naturai, 
chemical, and experimental philosophy ; and the French and 
Spanish languages, and such other learning and science as the 
capacities of the scholars may merit or want. The Greek and 
Latin languages are not forbidden, but are not recommended. 

By the ninth article it is declared, that the boys shall remain 
in the college till they arrive at between fourteen and eighteen 



years of age, when they shall be bound out by the city govern- 
ment to suitable occupations, such as agriculture, navigation, 
mechanical trades, &c. 

The testator then proceeds to say that he necessarily leaves 
many details to the city government ; and then adds, " there are, 
however, some restrictions which I consider it my duty to pre- 
scribe, and to be, amongst others, conditions on which my be- 
quest for said college is made, and to be enjoyed." 

The second of these restrictions is in the following words : 

"Secondly. I enjoin and require that no ecclesiastic, missionary, or minister, 
of any sect whatever, shall ever hold or exercise any station or duty whatever, 
in the said college ,- nor shall any such person ever be admitted for any purpose, 
or as a visiter, within the premises appropriated to the purposes of the said college. 

"In making this restriction, I do not mean to cast any reflection upon any sect or 
person whatsoever ; but, as there is such a diversity of opinion amongst them, I de- 
sire to keep the tender minds of the orphans, who are to derive advantage from this 
bequest, free from the excitement which clashing doctrines and sectarian controversy 
are so apt to produce ; my desire is, that all the instructers and teachers in the col- 
lege shall take pains to instil into the minds of the scholars the purest principles of 
morality, so that on then entrance into active life they may, from inclination and 
habits, evince benevolence towards their fellow-creatures, and a love of truth, so- 
briety, and industry, adopting at the same time such religious tenets as their ma- 
tured reason may enable them to prefer. " 

The testator having, after the date of his will, bought a house 
in Penn township, with forty-five acres of land, he made a codi- 
cil, by which he directed the college to be built on this estate, 
instead of the square mentioned in the will, and the whole es- 
tablishment to be made thereon, just as if he had in his wil 
devoted the estate to that purpose. 

The city government has accordingly been advised that the 
whole forty-five acres must be enclosed with the same high 
wall, as was provided in the will for the square in the city. 

I have now stated, I believe, all the provisions of the will 
which are material to the discussion of that part of the case 
which respects the character of the institution. 

The first question is, whether this devise can be sustained, 
otherwise than as a charity, and by that special aid and assist- 
ance by which courts of equity support gifts to charitable uses. 

If the devise be a good limitation at law, if it require no e£- 
2 



10 

ercise of the favor which is bestowed on privileged testaments, 
then there is already an end to the question. But I take it, 
that this point is conceded. The devise is void, according to 
the general rules of law, on account of the uncertainty in the 
description of those who are intended to receive its benefits. 

" Poor white male orphan children" is so loose a descrip- 
tion, that no one can bring himself within the terms of the 
bequest, so as to say that it was made in his favor. No indi- 
vidual can acquire any right, or interest; nobody, therefore, can 
come forward as*a party, in a court of law, to claim participa- 
tion in the gift. 

The bequest must stand, then, if it stand at all, on the peculiar 
rules which equitable jurisprudence applies to charities. This 
is clear. 

I proceed, therefore, to submit, and most conscientiously to ar- 
gue, a question, certainly one of the highest which this court has 
been called upon to consider, and one of the highest, and most 
important, in my opinion, ever likely to come before it. That 
question is,whether, in the eye of equitable jurisprudence, this 
devise be a charity at all. I deny that it is so. I maintain, 
that neither by judicial decisions, nor by correct reasoning on 
general principles, can this devise or bequest be regarded as a 
charity. This part of the argument is not affected by the par- 
ticular judicial system of Pennsylvania, or the question of the 
power of her courts to uphold and administer charitable gifts. 
The question which I now propose, respects the inherent, es- 
sential, and manifest character of the devise itself. In this re- 
spect, I wish to express myself clearly, and to be correctly a#d 
distinctly understood. What I have said, I shall stand by, and 
endeavor to maintain, viz : that in the view of a court of equity 
this devise is no charity at all. It is no charity, because the 
plan of education proposed by Mr. Girard is derogatory to the 
Christian religion ; tends to weaken men's reverence for that 
religion, and their conviction of its authority and importance ; 
and therefore, in its general character, tends to mischievous, and 
not to useful ends. 

The proposed school is to be founded on plain and clear 



11 

principles, and for plain and clear objects, of infidelity. This 
cannot well be doubted; and a gift, or devise, for such objects, 
is not a charity, and as such entitled to the well known favor 
with which charities are received and upheld by the courts of 
Christian countries. 

In the next place, the object of this bequest is against the 
public policy of the State of Pennsylvania, in which State Chris= 
tianity is declared to be the law of the land. For that reason, 
therefore, as well as the other, the devise ought not to be allow- 
ed to take effect. 

These are the two propositions which it is my purpose to 
maintain, on this part of the case. 

This scheme of instruction begins by attempting to attach 
reproach and odium to the whole clergy of the country. It 
places a brand, a stigma, on every individual member of the 
profession, without an exception. No minister of the gospel, 
of any denomination, is to be allowed to come within the 
grounds belonging to las school, on any occasion, or for any 
purpose whatever. They are all rigorously excluded, as if 
their mere presence might cause pestilence. 

We have heard it said that Mr. Girard, by this will, distri- 
buted his charity without distinction of sect or party. How- 
ever that may be, sir, he certainly has dealt out opprobrium to 
the whole profession of the clergy, without regard to sect or 
party. 

By this will, no minister of the gospel of any sect or de- 
nomination whatever, can be authorized or allowed to hold 
any office within the college ; and not only that, but no minis- 
ter or clergyman of any sect can, for any purpose whatever, 
enter within the walls that are to surround this college. If a 
clergyman has a sick nephew, or a sick grandson, he cannot, 
upon any pretext, be allowed to visit him within the walls of 
the college. The provision of the will is express and decisive. 
Still less may a clergyman enter to offer consolation to the 
sick, or to unite in prayer with the dying. 

Now, I will not arraign Mr. Girard or his motives for this. 
I will not inquire into Mr. Girard's opinions upon religion. 



12 

But I feel bound to say (the occasion demands that I should 
say) that this is the most opprobrious, the most insulting, and 
unmerited stigma that ever was cast, or attempted to be cast, 
upon the preachers of Christianity, from north to south, from 
east to west, the length and breadth of the land, in the history 
of the country. When have they deserved it? Where have 
they deserved it? How have they deserved it? They are 
not to be allowed even the ordinary rights of hospitality ! 
Not even to be permitted to put their foot over the threshold 
of this college! 

Sir, I take it upon myself to say, that in no country in the 
world, upon either continent, can there be found a body of 
ministers of the gospel who perform so much service to man, 
in such a full spirit of self-denial, under so little encourage- 
ment from Government of any kind, and under circumstances, 
always much straitened and often distressed, as the ministers 
of the gospel in the United States, of all denominations ! 

They form no part of any established order of religion ; they 
constitute no hierarchy ; they enjoy no peculiar privileges — in 
some of the States they are even shut out from all participa- 
tion in the political rights and privileges enjoyed by their fellow- 
citizens; they enjoy no tithes — no public provision of any kind. 
And except here and there, in large cities, where a wealthy 
individual occasionally makes a donation for the support of 
public worship, what have they to depend upon ? They have 
to depend entirely on the voluntary contributions of those who 
hear them. 

And this body of clergymen has shown, to the honor of 
their own country, and to the astonishment of the hierarchies 
of the old world, that it is practicable in free governments to 
raise and sustain a body of clergymen — which for devotedness 
to their sacred calling, for purity of life and character, for learn- 
ing, intelligence, piety, and that wisdom which cometh from 
above, is inferior to none, and superior to most others, by 
voluntary contributions alone. 

I hope that our learned men have done something for the 
honor of our literature abroad. I hope that the courts of justice 



13 

and members of the bar of this country have done some- 
thing to elevate the character of the profession of the law — I 
hope that the discussions above (in Congress) have done some- 
thing to meliorate the condition of the human race, to secure and 
extend the great charter of human rights, and to strengthen 
and advance the great principles of human liberty. But I con- 
tend that no literary efforts, no adjudications, no constitutional 
discussions, nothing that has been done or said in favor of the 
great interests of universal man, has done this country more 
credit at home and abroad, than the establishment of our body 
of clergymen, their support by voluntary contributions, and 
the general excellence of their character, their piety, and 
learning. 

That great truth has been thus proclaimed and proved, (a 
truth which I believe will in time to come shake all the hier- 
archies of Europe,) that the voluntary support of such a minis- 
try, under free institutions, is a practicable idea. 

And yet every one of these is by this devise denied the priv- 
ileges which are at the same time open to the vilest of our 
race—every one is shut out from this, I had almost said, sanc- 
tum — but I will not profane that word by such a use of it. 

Did the man ever live that had a respect for the Christian 
religion, and yet had no regard for any one of its ministers ? 
Did that system of instruction ever exist, which denounced the 
whole body of Christian teachers, and yet called itself a system 
of Christianity? 

The learned counsel on the other side see the weak points 
of this case. They are not blind. They have, with the aid 
of their great learning, industry, and research, gone back to 
the time of Constantine — have gone through the history of the 
Roman Emperors — the dark ages and the intervening period- 
down to the settlement of these colonies ; they have explored 
every nook and corner of religious and Christian history, to 
find out the various meanings and uses of Christian charity ; 
and yet, with all their skill and all their research, they have 
not been able to discover any thing which has ever been re- 
garded as a Christian charity, which sets such an opprobrium 



14 

upon the forehead of all its ministers. If, with all their en- 
deavors, they can find any one thing which has been so re- 
garded, they may have their college, and make the most of it. 

The thing does not exist — it never had a beiiig — history 
does not record it— common sense revolts at it. 

It certainly is not necessary for me to make an ecclesiastical 
argument in support of this proposition. The thing is so plain 
that it must instantly commend itself to your Honors. 

It has been said that Mr. Girard was charitable. I am not 
now going to controvert this. I hope he was. I hope he has 
found his reward. It has also been asked, " cannot Mr. Girard 
be allowed to have his own will — to devise his property ac- 
cording to his own desire ?" Certainly he can, in any legal 
devise, and the law will sustain him therein. But it is not for 
him to overturn the law of the land. The law cannot be al- 
tered to please Mr. Girard. He found that out, I believe, in 
two or three instances in his lifetime. 

Nor can the law be altered on account of the magnitude and 
munificence of the bounty. What is the value of that bounty, 
however great or munificent, which touches the very founda- 
tions of human society — which touches the very foundations of 
Christian charity — which touches the very foundations of pub- 
lic law, and the Constitution, and the whole welfare of the 
State ? 

And now, let me ask, what is, in contemplation of law, " a 
charity?" The word has various significations. In the larger 
and broader sense, it means the kindly exercise of the social 
affections — all the good feelings which man entertains towards 
man. Charity is love. This is that charity of which St. Paul 
speaks — that charity which covereth the sins of men — " that 
surfereth all things, hopeth all things." In a more popular 
sense, charity is alms-giving or active benevolence. 

But the question for your Honors to decide here is, what is 
a charity, or a charitable use, in contemplation of law. To 
answer this inquiry, we are generally referred to the objects 
enumerated in the 43d of Elizabeth. The objects enumerated 
in that statute, and others analogous to them, are charities in 
the sense of equitable jurisprudence. 



15 

There is no doubt a school of learning is a charity. It is 
one of those mentioned in the statutes. Such a school of learn- 
ing as was contemplated by the statutes of Elizabeth is a 
charity; and all such have borne that name and character to 
this day. 

I mean to confine myself to that description of charity — 
the statute charity ; and to apply that description to this case 
alone. 

The devise before us proposes to establish, as, its main object, 
a school of learning — a college. There are provisions of course, 
for lodging, clothing, and feeding the pupils — but ail this is 
subsidiary. The great object is the instruction of the young; 
although it proposes to give the children better food and clothes 
and lodging, and proposes that the system of education shall be 
somewhat better than that which is usually provided for the 
poor and destitute in our public institutions generally. 

The main object, then, is to establish a school of learning for 
children, beginning with them at a very tender age, and re- 
taining them (viz : from 6 years to 18) till they are on the 
verge of manhood, when they will have expended more 
than one-third part of the average duration of human life. 
For if the college takes them at six, and keeps them till they are 
eighteen, a period of twelve years will be passed, which is 
much more than a third part of the average of human exist- 
ence. These children, then, are to be taken almost before 
they learn their alphabet, and be discharged about the time 
that men enter on the active business of life. At six, many do 
not know their alphabet. John Wesley did not know a letter till 
after he was six years old, and his mother then took him on 
her lap, and taught him his alphabet at a single lesson. And 
there are many parents who think that any attempt to instil 
the rudiments of education into the mind of a child earlier 
than that age, is little better than labor thrown away. 

The great object, then, which Mr. Girard seemed to have 
in view, was to take these orphans at this very tender age, and 
to keep them within his walls until they were entering man- 
hood. And this object, I pray your Honors steadily to bear 
in mind. 



16 

I never, in the whole course of my life, listened to any thing 
with more sincere delight than to the remarks of my learned 
friend who opened this cause, on the nature and character of 
true charity. I agree with every word he said on that subject. I 
almost envy him his power of expressing so happily what his 
mind conceived so clearly and correctly. He is right when he 
speaks of it as an emanation of the Christian religion. He is 
right when he says that it has its origin in the word of God. He 
is right when he says that it was unknown through ail the 
globe till the first dawn of Christianity. He is right, pre-emi- 
nently right, in all this, as he was pre-eminently happy in his 
power of clothing his thoughts and feelings in appropriate 
forms of speech. 

And I maintain, that in any institution for the instruction of 
youth, where the authority of God is disowned, and the duties 
of Christianity derided and despised, and its ministers shut out 
from all participation in its proceedings, there can no more be 
charity, true charity, found to exist, than evil can spring out of 
the Bible, error out of truth, or hatred and animosity come 
forth from the bosom of perfect love. 

No, sir ! No, sir! If charity denies its birth and parent- 
age — if it turns infidel to the great doctrines of the Christian 
religion— if it tarns unbeliever — it is no longer charity! There 
is no longer charity, either in a Christian sense, or in the sense 
of jurisprudence; for it separates itself from the fountain of 
its own creation. 

There is nothing in the history of the Christian religion ; 
there is nothing in the history of human laws, either before 
or after the Conquest ; there can be found no such thing as a 
school of instruction in a Christian land, from which the Chris- 
tian religion has been, of intent and purpose, rigorously and 
opprobriously excluded, and yet such school regarded as a char- 
itable trust, or foundation. This is the first instance on record. 
I do not say that there may not be charity schools, in which re- 
ligious instruction is not provided. I need not go that length, 
although I take that to be the rule of the English law. But 
what I do say, and repeat, is, that a school for the instruction 
of the young, which sedulously and reproachfully excludes 



17 

Christian knowledge, is no charity, either on principle or au- 
thority, and is not, therefore, entitled to the character of a 
charity in a court of equity. I have considered this proposi- 
tion, and am ready to stand by it. 

I will not say there may not be a charity for instruction in 
which there is no positive provision for the Christian religion. 
But I do say, and do insist, that there is no such thing in the 
history of religion, no such thing in the history of human 
law, as a charity— a school of instruction for children from 
which the Christian religion and Christian teachers are exclu- 
ded, as unsafe and unworthy intruders. Such a scheme is de± 
prived of that which enters into the very essence of human 
benevolence, when that benevolence contemplates the instruc- 
tion, that is to say, religious knowledge, connected with hu- 
man knowledge ; it is this which causes it to be regarded as a 
charity ; and by reason of which it is entitled to the special 
favor of the courts of law. 

This is the vital question which must be decided by this 
Court. It is vital to the understanding of what the law is— -it is 
vital to the validity of this devise. 

If this be true, if there can be no charity in that plan of 
education which opposes Christianity, then that goes far to de- 
cide this case. 

I take it that this Court, in looking at this subject, will see 
the important bearing of this point upon it. 

The learned counsel said that the State of Pennsylvania 
was not an infidel State. It is true that she is not an infidel- 
State. She has a Christian origin — a Christian code of laws— 
a system of legislation founded on nothing else, in many of ifs 
important bearings upon human society, than the belief of the 
people of Pennsylvania — their firm and sincere belief, in the 
divine authority and great importance of the truths of the 
Christian religion. And she should the more carefully seek to 
preserve them pure. 

Now, let us look at the condition and prospects of these ten- 
der children, who are to be submitted to this experiment of 
instruction without Christianity. In the first place, they are 
orphans — have no parents to guide or instruct them in the 
3 



18 

way in which they should go— no father, no religious mother, 
to lead them to the pure fount of Christianity — they are or- 
phans ! 

If they were only poor, there might be somebody bound by 
the ties of human affection to look after their spiritual welfare; 
to see that they imbibed no erroneous opinions on the subject 
of religion ; that they run into no excessive improprieties of 
belief as well as conduct ; the child would have its father or 
mother to teach it to lisp the name of its Creator in prayer, or 
hymn His praise. 

But in this experimental school of instruction, if the or- 
phans have any friends or connexions able to look after their 
welfare, it shuts them out. It is made the duty of the govern- 
ors of the institution, on taking the child, so to make out the 
indentures of apprenticeship as to keep it from any after inter- 
ference in its welfare on the part of guardians or relatives ; to 
keep these from withdrawing it from the school, or interfering 
with its instruction whilst it is in the school, in any manner 
whatever. 

The school or college is to be surrounded by high walls ; 
there are to be two gates in these walls, and no more ; they 
are to be of iron within and iron bound or covered without ; 
thus answering more to the description of a castle than a 
school house. The children are then to be thus guarded for 
twelve years in this, I do not mean to say a prison, nor do I 
mean to say that this is exactly close confinement ; but it is 
much more, much closer confinement, than ordinarily is met 
with under the rules of any institution at presest, and has a 
resemblance to the monastic institutions of past ages, rather 
than to any school for instruction at this period. 

All is to be within one great enclosure ; all that is done for 
the bodily or mental welfare of the child is to be done with- 
in this enclosure. It has been said that the children could at- 
tend public worship elsewhere. Where is the proof of this ? 
There is no such provision in the devise ; there is nothing said 
about it in any part of Mr. Girard's will ; and I shall show 
presently that any such thing would be just as adverse to Mr. Gi- 



19 

rard's whole scheme, as it would be that the doctrines of Chris- 
tianity should be preached within the walls of the college. 

These children, then, are taken before they know the alpha- 
bet. They are kept till the period of early manhood, and then 
sent out into world to enter upon its business and affairs. By 
this time, the character will have been stamped. For if there 
is any truth in the Bible, if there is any truth in those oracles 
which soar above all human authority, or if any thing be es- 
tablished as a general fact, by the experience of mankind, in 
this fii st third of human life the character is formed. And 
what sort of a character is likely to be made by this process, 
this experimental system of instruction ? 

I have read the two provisions of Mr. Girard's will in rela- 
tion to this feature of his school. The first excludes the Chris- 
tian religion and all its ministers from his walls. The second 
explains the whole principles upon which he purposes to con- 
duct his school. It was to try an experiment in education, 
never before known to the Christian world. It had been re- 
commended often enough among those who did not belong to 
the Christian world. But it was never known to exist, never 
adopted by any body even professing a connexion with 
Christianity. 

And I cannot do better, in order to show the tendency and 
object of this institution, than to read from a paper by Bishop 
White, which has been referred to by the other side.* 

Now, in order to a right understanding of what was Mr. 
Girard's real intention, and original design, we have only to 
read carefully the words of the clause I have referred to. He 
enjoins that no ministers of religion, of any sects, shall be al- 
lowed to enter his college, on any pretence whatever. Now, 
it is obvious, that by sects, he means Christian sects. Any of 
the followers of Voltaire or D'Alembert may have admission 
into this school whenever they please, because they are not 
usually spoken of as " sects.'' The doors are to be opened to 
the opposers and revilers of Christianity, in every form and 
shape, and shut to its supporters. While the voice of the up- 

* Vide Appendix, No. 1. 



20 

holders of Christianity is never to be heard within the walls, the 
voices of those who impugn Christianity may be raised high 
and loud, till they shake the marble roof of the building. 

It is no less derogatory thus to exclude the one, and to ad- 
mit the other, than it would be to make a positive provision 
and all the necessary arrangements for lectures and lessons and 
teachers, for all the details of the doctrines of infidelity. It is 
equally derogatory, it is the same in principle, thus to shut the 
door to one party, and open the door to the other. 

We must reason as to the probable results of such a system 
according to natural consequences. They say, on the other 
side, that infidel teachers will not be admitted in this school. 
How do they know that ? What is the inevitable tendency of 
such an education as is here prescribed ? What is likely to 
occur ? The Court cannot suppose that the trustees will act 
in opposition to the directions of the will. If they accept the 
trustj they must fulfil it, and carry out the details of Mr. 
Girard's plan. 

Now, what is likely to be the effect of this system on the 
minds of these children, thus left solely to its pernicious in- 
fluence, with no one to care for their spiritual welfare in this 
world or the next ? They are to be left entirely to the tender 
mercies of those who will try upon them this experiment of mor- 
al philosophy or philosophical morality. Morality, without sen- 
timent. Benevolence towards man, without a sense of respon- 
sibility towards God. The duties of this life performed, with- 
out any reference to the life which is to come. This is Mr. 
Girard's theory of useful education. 

Half of these poor children may die before the term of their 
education expires. Still, those who survive must be brought 
up imbued fully with the inevitable tendencies of the system 
It has been said that there. may be lay preachers among 
them. Lay preachers! This is ridiculous enough in a coun- 
try of Christianity and religion. [Here some one handed Mr. 
Webster a note.] A friend informs me that in four of the 
principal religious sects in this country, the Episcopalians, 
Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists, they allow no lay 
preachers} and these four constitute a large majority of the re- 



21 

ligious and Christian portion of the people of the United 
States. And, besides, lay preaching was just as adverse to 
Mr. Girard's original object and whole plan, as professional 
preaching ; provided, it should be Christianity, which should 
be preached. 

It is plain, as plain as language can be made, that he 
did not intend to allow the minds of these children to be 
troubled about religion of any kind, whilst they were with- 
in the college. And why ? He himself assigns the reason. 
Because of the difficulty and trouble, he says, that might arise 
from the multitude of seels and creeds, and teachers, and the 
various clashing doctrines and tenets advanced by the different 
preachers of Christianity. Therefore, his desire as to these or- 
phans is, that their minds should be kept free from all bias of 
any kind in favor of any description of Christian creed, till 
they arrived at manhood, and should have left his wails. 

Now, are not laymen equally sectarian in their views as cler- 
gymen ? And would it not be just as easy to prevent sectarian 
doctrines from being preached by a clergyman as being taught 
by a layman ? It is idle, therefore, to speak of lay preaching. 

Mr. Sergeant here rose, and said that they on their side had 
not uttered one word about lay preaching. It was lay teach- 
ing they spoke of. 

Mr. Webster. Well, I would just as soon take it that way as 
the other — leaching, as preaching. Is not the teaching of lay- 
men as sectarian as the preaching of clergymen ? What is the 
difference between unlettered laymen and lettered clergymen in 
this respect ? Every one knows that laymen are as violent con- 
troversialists as clergymen, and the less informed the more 
violent. So this, while it is a little more ridiculous, is equally 
obnoxious. [Here there was quite a burst of laughter in the 
Court.] According to my experience, a layman is just as like- 
ly to launch out into sectarian views, and to advance clashing 
doctrines and violent bigoted prejudices, and even more so, 
than professional preachers. And the introduction, therefore, 
of these controversies by laymen, would not be a very edifying 
mode of teaching, nor would it be a very edifying example. 
As in other cases, so in this, the greatest degree of candor is 



22 

usually found accompanying the greatest degree of knowledge. 
Nothing is more apt to be positive, and dogmatical, than igno- 
rance. 

But there is no provision in any feature of Mr. Girard's 
will for the introduction of any lay teaching on religious mat- 
ters whatever. The children are to get their religion when 
they leave his school, and they are to have nothing to do with 
religion before they do leave it. They are then to choose their 
religious opinions, and not before. 

Mr. Binney. " Choose their tenets" is the expression. 

Mr. Webster. Tenets are opinions, I believe. The mass 
of one's religious tenets makes up one's religion. 

Now, it is evident that Mr. Girard meant to found a schoo} 
of morals, without any reference to or connexion with religion. 
But, after all, there is nothing original in this plan of his. It 
has its origin in a deistical source, but not from the highest 
school of infidelity. Not from Bolingbroke, or Shaftesbury, 
or Gibbon ; not even from Voltaire or D'Alembert. It is from 
two persons, who were probably known to Mr. Girard in the 
early part of his life — it is from Mr. Thomas Paine and Mr. 
Volney. Mr. Thomas Paine, in his Age of Reason, says : 
" Let us devise means to establish schools of instruction, that 
we may banish the ignorance that the ancient regime of kings 
and priests have spread among the people. Let us propagate 
morality, unfettered by superstition." 

Mr. Binney. What do you get that from ? 

Mr. Webster. The same place that Mr. Girard got this 
provision of his will from — Paine's Age of Reason. The same 
phraseology in effect is here. Paine disguised his real mean- 
ing, it is true. He said : " Let us devise means to establish 
schools to propagate morality, unfettered by superstition. ^ 
Mr. Girard, who had no disguise about him, uses plain lan- 
guage to express the same meaning. In Mr. Girard's view, 
religion is just that thing which Mr. Paine calls superstition 
Let us establish schools of morality, said he, unfettered by re- 
ligious tenets. Let us give these children a system of pure 
morals before they adopt any religion. The ancient regime of 
which Paine spoke as obnoxious was that of kings and priests- 



23 

That was the popular way he had of making any thing obnox- 
ious that he wished to destroy. Now, if he had merely wished 
to get rid of the dogmas which he says were established by 
kings and priests — if he had no desire to abolish the Christian 
religion itself — he could have thus expressed himself: "Let 
us rid ourselves of the errors of kings and priests, and plant 
morality on the plain text of the Christian religion, with the 
simplest forms of religious worship. " 

I do not intend to leave this part of the cause, however, 
without a still more distinct statement vof the objections to 
this scheme of instruction. This is due, I think, to the subject 
and to the occasion ; and I trust I shall not be considered 
presumptuous, or as trenching upon the duties which properly 
belong to another profession. But I deem it due to the cause of 
Christianity to take up the notions of this scheme of Mr. Gi- 
rard, and show how mistaken is the idea of calling it a chari- 
ty. In the first place, then, I say, this scheme is derogatory to 
Christianity, because it rejects Christianity from the education 
of youth, by rejecting its teachers — by rejecting the ordinary 
agencies of instilling the Christian religion into the minds of the 
young. I do not say that, in order to make this a charity, there 
should be a positive provision for the teaching of Christianity, 
although I take that to be the rule in an English court of equity. 
But I need not, in this case, claim" the whole benefit of that rule. 
But I say it is derogatory, because there is a positive rejection of 
Christianity — because it rejects the ordinary means and agen- 
cies of Christianity. He who rejects the ordinary means of 
accomplishing an end, means to defeat that end itself, or else 
he has no meaning. And it will not be supposed, I trust, that 
I am intruding on ground belonging to another profession, if { 
enlarge a little on that proposition. He who rejects the ordi- 
nary means of accomplishing an end, intends to defeat the 
end itself. And I say that this is true, although the means 
originally be means of human appointment, and not attaching 
to or resting oti any higher authority. 

Forexample,if the NewTestamenthad contained a set of prin- 
ciples of morality and religion, without reference to the means 



24 

by which those principles were to be established, and yet, if 
in the course of time a system of means had sprung rip, become 
identified with the history of the world, become general, sane- 
tioned by continued use and custom, then he who rejects those 
means would design to reject, and would reject, that morality 
and religion themselves. 

This is strictly true, where the end rested on divine authority, 
and human agency devised and used the means. But if the 
means themselves be of divine authority also, then the rejec- 
tion of them is direct rejection of that authority. 

Now, I suppose there is nothing in the New Testament more 
clearly established by the Author of Christianity than the ap- 
pointment of a Christian ministry. The world was to be 
evangelized, was to be brought out of darkness' into light, by 
the influences of the Christian religion, spread and propagated 
by the instrumentality of man. A Christian ministry was there- 
fore appointed by the Author of the Christian religion himself, and 
it stands on the same authority as any other part of his religion. 
When the lost sheep of the house of Israel were to be brought 
to the knowledge of Christianity, the Disciples were com- 
manded to go forth into all the cities, and to preach " that the 
kingdom of Heaven is at hand." It was added, that whoso- 
ever should not receive them, nor hear their words, it should 
be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha, than for them. 
And after his resurrection, in the appointment of the great 
mission to the whole human race, the Author of Christianity 
commanded his Disciples that they should " go into all the 
world, and preach the gospel to every creature." This was 
one of his last commands ; and one of his last promises was 
the assurance, " Lo, I am with you alvvay, even to the end of 
the world !" I say, therefore, there is nothing set forth more 
authentically in the New Testament than the appointment of 
a Christian ministry ; and he who does not believe this, does 
not and cannot believe the rest. It is true that Christian min- 
isters, in this age of the world, are selected, in different ways and 
different modes, by different sects and denominations. But there 
are, still, ministers of all sects and denominations. Why should 
we shut our eyes to the whole history of Christianity ? Is it 



25 

not the preaching of ministers of the gospel that has evangel- 
ized the more civilized part of the world? Why do we, at 
this day, enjoy the lights and benefits of Christianity ourselves ? 
Do we not owe it to the instrumentality of the Christian minis- 
try ? The ministers of Christianity, departing from Asia Minor, 
traversing Asia, Africa, through Europe, to Iceland, Green- 
land, and the poles of the earth, suffering all things, enduring 
all things, hoping all things, raising men every where from the 
ignorance of idol worship to the knowledge of the true God, 
and every where bringing life and immortality to light, through 
the gospel, have only been acting in obedience to the Divine 
instruction ; they were commanded to go forth, and they have 
gone forth, and they still go forth. They have sought, and 
they still seek, to be able to preach the gospel to every crea- 
ture under the whole Heaven. And where was Christianity 
ever received, where were its truths ever poured into the human 
heart, where tlid its waters, springing up into everlasting life, 
ever burst forth, except in the track of a Christian ministry ? 
Did we ever hear of an instance, does history record an in- 
stance, of any part of the globe Christianized by lay preachers 
or " lay teachers ?" And, descending from kingdoms and em- 
pires to cities and countries, to parishes and villages, do we 
not all know that wherever Christianity has been carried, and 
wherever it has been taught, by human agency, that agency 
was the agency of ministers of the gospel ? It is all idle, and 
a mockery, to pretend that any man has respect for the Chris- 
tian religion who yet derides, reproaches, and stigmatizes all 
its ministers and teachers. It is all idle, it is a mockery, and 
an insult to common sense, to maintain that a school for the 
instruction of youth, from which Christian instruction, by 
Christian teachers, is sedulously and rigorously shut out, is not 
deistical and infidel, both in its purpose and its tendency. I 
insist, therefore, that this plan of education is, in this respect, 
derogatory to Christianity, in opposition to it, and calculated 
either to subvert or to supersede it. 

In the next place, this scheme of education is derogatory to 
Christianity, because it proceeds upon the presumption that the 
4 



26 

Christian religion is not the only true foundation, or any ne- 
cessary foundation, of morals. The ground taken is, that reli- 
gion is not necessary to morality ; that benevolence may be 
ensured by habit, and that all the virtues may flourish, and be 
safely left to the chance of flourishing, without touching the 
waters of the living spring of religious responsibility. With 
him who thinks thus, what can be fiie value of the Christian 
revelation ? So the Christian world has not thought ; for with 
that Christian world, throughout its broadest extent, it has 
been, and is, held as a fundamental truth, that religion is the 
only solid basis of morals, and that moral instruction, not rest- 
ing on this basis, is only a building upon sand. And at what 
age of the Christian era have those who professed to teach the 
Christian religion, or to believe in its authority and importance, 
not insisted on the absolute necessity of inculcating its princi- 
ples and its precepts into the minds of the young ? In what 
age, by what sect, where, when, by whom, has religious truth 
been excluded from the education of youth ? No where ; never, 
Every where, and all times, it has been, and it is, regarded as 
essential. It is of the essence, the vitality, of useful instruction. 
From all this, Mr. Girard dissents. His plan denies the neces= 
sity and the propriety of religious instruction as a part of the 
education of youth. He dissents, not only from all the senti- 
ments of Christian mankind, from all common conviction, and 
from the results of all experience, but he dissents, also, from still 
higher authority — the word of God itself. My learned friend has 
referred, with propriety , to one of the commands of the Decalogue ; 
but there is another, a first commandment, and that is a precept 
of religion, and it is in subordination to this, that the moral precepts 
of the Decalogne are proclaimed. This first great commandment 
teaches man that there is one, and only one, great first cause — 
one, and only one, proper object of human worship. This is 
the great, the ever fresh, the overflowing fountain of all re- 
vealed truth. Without it, human hfe is a desert, of no known 
termination on any side, but shut in on all sides by a dark and 
impenetrable horizon. Without the light of this truth, man 
knows nothing of his origin, and nothing of his end. And 



27 

when the Decalogue was delivered to the Jews, with this great 
announcement and command at -its head, what said the in- 
spired lawgiver ? that it should be kept from children ? that 
it should be reserved as a communication fit only for mature 
age ? Far, far otherwise. " And these words, which I com- 
mand thee this day, shall be in thy heart. And thou shalt 
teach them diligently unto thy children, and shall talk of them 
when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the 
way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." 

There is an authority still more imposing and awful. When 
little children were brought into the presence of the Son of God, 
his Disciples proposed to send them away ; but he said, " Suffer 
little children to come unto me" — unto me; he did not send them 
first for lessons in morals to the schools of the Pharisees or to 
the unbelieving Saducees, nor to read the precepts and lessons 
phylacteried on the garments of the Jewish priesthood p he 
said nothing of different creeds or clashing doctrines ; but he 
opened at once to the youthful mind the everlasting fountain 
of living waters, the only source of immortal truths ; " Suffer 
little children to come unto me." And that injunction is of 
perpetual obligation. It addresses itself to-day with the same 
earnestness and the same authority which attended its first ut- 
terance to the Christian world. It is of force every where, 
and at all times. It extends to the ends of the earth, it 
will reach to the end of time, always and every where sound- 
ing in the ears of men, with an emphasis which no repetition 
can weaken, and with an authority which nothing can super- 
sede — " Suffer little children to come unto me." 

And not only my heart, and my judgment, my belief, and 
my conscience, instruct me that this great precept should be 
obeyed, but the idea is so sacred, the solemn thoughts connect- 
ed with it so crowd upon me, it is so utterly at variance with 
this system of philosophical morality which we have heard 
advocated, that I stand and speak here in fear of being in- 
fluenced by my feelings to exceed the proper line of my pro- 
fessional duty. Go thy way at this time, is the language of 
philosophical morality, and I will send for thee at a more con- 



28 

venient season. This is the language of Mr. Girard, in his 
will. In this there is neither religion nor reason. 

The earliest and the most urgent intellectual want of human 
nature is, the knowledge of its origin, its duty, and its destiny. 
" Whence am I, what am I, and what is before me ?" This is 
the cry of the human soul, so soon as it raises its contemplation 
above visible material things. 

When an intellectual being finds himself on this earth, as 
soon as the faculties of reason operate, one of the first inquiries 
of his mind is, "Shall I be here always. " "Shall I be here 
forever?" And reasoning from what he sees daily occurring to 
others, he learns to a certainty that his state of being must one 
day be changed. I do not mean to deny, that it may be true that 
he is created with this consciousness ; but whether it be con- 
sciousness, or the result of his reasoning faculties, man soon 
learns that he must die. And of all sentient beings, he alone, so 
far as we can judge, attains to this knowledge. His Maker has 
made him capable of learning this. Before he knows his origin 
and destiny, he knows that he is to die. Then comes that most 
urgent and solemn demand for light that ever proceeded, or 
can proceed, from the profound and anxious broodings of the 
human soul. It is stated, with wonderful force and beauty, in 
that incomparable composition, the book of Job — " For there is 
hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it ivill sprout again, 
and that the tender branch thereof will not cease ; that 
through the scent of water, it ivill bud arid bring forth 
boughs like a plant. But if a man die, shall he live again ?" 
And that question nothing but God, and the religion of God, 
can solve. Religion does solve it, and teaches every man 
that he is to live again, and that the duties of this life have ref- 
erence to the life which is to come. And hence, since the in- 
troduction of Christianity, it has been the duty, as it has been 
the effort, of the great and the good, to sanctify human know, 
ledge, to bring it to the fount, and to baptise learning into 
Christianity; to gather up all its productions, its earliest and 
its latest, its blossoms and its fruits, and lay them all upon the 
altar of religion and virtue. 



29 

Another important point involved in this question is, what 
becomes of the Christian Sabbath, in a school thus established? 
I do not mean to say that this stands exactly on the same au- 
thority as the Christian religion, but I mean to say that the 
observance of the Sabbath is a part of Christianity in all its 
forms. All Christians admit the observance of the Sabbath. 
All admit that there is a Lord's day, although there may be a 
difference in the belief as to which is the right day to be observ- 
ed. Now, I say that in this institution, under Mr. Girard's 
scheme, the ordinary observance of the Sabbath could not take 
place, because the ordinary means of observing it are excluded. 
I know that I shall be told here, also, that lay teachers would 
come in again ; and I say again, in reply, that where the or- 
dinary means of attaining an end are excluded, the intention 
is to exclude the end itself. There can be no Sabbath in this 
college — there can be no religious observance of the Lord's 
day ; for there are no means for attaining that end. It will be 
said that the children would be permitted to go out. There is 
nothing seen of this permission in Mr. Girard's will. And I 
say again, that it would be just as much opposed to Mr. Gi- 
rard's whole scheme to allow these children to go out and at- 
tend places of public worship on the Sabbath day, as it would 
be to have ministers of religion to preach to them within the 
walls ; because if they go out to hear preaching, they will hear 
just as much about religious controversies, and clashing doc- 
trines, and more, than if appointed preachers officiated in the 
college. His object, as he states, was to keep their minds 
free from all religious doctrines and sects — and he would just 
as much defeat his ends by sending them out as by having reli- 
gious instruction within. Where, then,are these little children to 
go ? Where can they go to learn the truth— to reverence the 
Sabbath ? They are far from their friends — they have no one to 
accompany them to any place of worship— no one to show them 
the right from the wrong course; their minds must be kept clear 
from all bias on the subject, and they are just as far from the 
ordinary observance of the Sabbath as though there was no 
Sabbath day at all. And where there is no observance of the 



30 

Christian Sabbath, there will of course be no public worship 
of God. 

In connexion with this subject, I will observe, that there has 
been recently held a large convention of clergymen and lay- 
men in Columbus, Ohio, to bring the minds of the Christian 
public to the importance of a more particular observance of the 
Christian Sabbath ; and I will read, as part of my argument, 
an extract from their address, which bears with peculiar force 
upon this case. 

" It is alike obvious that the Sabbath exerts its salutary power by making the 
population acquainted with the being, perfections, and laws of God ; with our rela- 
tions to Him as his creatures, and our obligations to Him as rational, accountable 
subjects, and with our character as sinners, for whom His mercy has provided a 
Saviour ; under whose government we live to be restrained from sin and reconciled 
to God, and fitted by his word and spirit for the inheritance above. 

" It is by the reiterated instruction and impression which the Sabbath imparts to 
the population of a nation, by the moral principle which it forms — by the conscience 
which it maintains — by the habits of method, cleanliness, and industry, it creates — 
by the rest and renovated vigor it bestows on exhausted animal nature — by the 
lengthened life and higher health it affords — by the holiness it inspires, and cheer- 
ing hopes of Heaven, and the protection and favor of God, which its observance 
ensures — that the Sabbath is rendered the moral conservator of nations. 

" The omnipresent influence the Sabbath exerts, however, by no secret charm 
or compendious action, upon masses of unthinking minds ; but by arresting the 
•tream of worldly thoughts, interests, and affections — stopping the din of business- 
unlading the mind of its cares and responsibilities, and the body of its burdens, 
while God speaks to men, and they attend, and hear, and fear, and learn to do His 
will. 

' ' You might as well put out the sun, and think to enlighten the world with 
tapers — destroy the attraction of gravity, and think to wield the universe by human 
powers — as to extinguish the moral illumination of the Sabbath, and break this glo- 
rious mainspring of the moral government of God." 

And I would ask, would any Christian man consider it 
desirable for his orphan children, after his death, to find 
refuge within this asylum, under all the circumstances and 
character, and the characteristics, which belong to it ? Are 
there, or will there be, any Christian parents who would desire 
thattheirchildren should be placed in this school, to befor twelve 
yearsexposed to the pernicious influences which must be brought 
to bear on their minds? I very much doubt if there is any 
Christian father who hears me this day, and I am quite sure 



31 

that there is no Christian mother, who, if called upon to lie 
down on the bed of death, although sure to leave their 
children as poor as children can be left, who would not 
rather trust them, nevertheless, to the Christian charity of the 
world, however uncertain it has been said to be, than to place 
them where their physical wants and comforts would be 
abundantly attended to, but away from the solaces and con- 
solations, the graces and the grace of the Christian religion. 
They would rather trust them to the mercy and kindness of 
that spirit, which, when it has nothing else left, gives a cup of 
cold water in the name of a disciple — to that spirit which has its 
origin in the fountain of all good, and of which we have on 
record an example the most beautiful, the most touching, the 
most intensely affecting, that the world's history contains— I 
mean the offering of the poor widow, who threw her two mites 
into the treasury. "And he looked up, and saw the rich men 
casting their gifts into the treasury ; and he saw, also, a certain 
poor widow casting in thither two mites; and he said, of a truth, 
I say unto you that this poor widow hath cast in more than 
they all ; for all these have, of their abundance, cast in unto the 
offerings of God : but she of her penury hath cast in all the 
living that she had." What more tender, more solemnly affect- 
ing, more profoundly pathetic, than this charity, this offering to 
God, of a farthing ! We know nothing of her name, her 
family, or her tribe. We only know that she was a poor wo- 
man, and a widow, of whom there is nothing left upon record 
but this sublimely simple story, that when the rich came to cast 
their proud offerings into the treasury, this poor woman came 
also, and cast in her two mites ! which made a farthing ! And 
that example, thus made the subject of Divine commendation, 
has been read, and told, and gone abroad every where, and sunk 
deep into a hundred millions of hearts, since the commencement 
of the Christian Era — and that example has done more good than 
could be accomplished by a thousand marble palaces — because 
it was charity mingled with true benevolence — given in the 
fear, the love, the service, and honor of God — because it was 
charity — as all true charity is— that had its origin in the law of 



32 

God ! — because it was a gift to the honor of God ! Cases 
have come before the courts, of bequests, in last wills, made 
or given to God, without any more specific direction ; and 
these bequests have been regarded as creating charitable uses. 
But can that be truly called a charity, which flies in the face of 
all the laws of God, and all the usages of Christian man ? I 
arraign no man for mixing up a love of distinction and notorie- 
ty with his charities. I blame not Mr. Girard because he de- 
sired to raise a splendid marble palace in the neighborhood of a 
beautiful city, that should endure for ages, and transmit his 
name and fame to posterity. But his school of learning is not 
to be valued, because it has not the chastening influences 
of true religion — because it has uo fragrance of the spirit of 
Christianity. It is not a charity, for it has not that which gives 
to a charity for education its chief value. It will, therefore, 
sooth the heart of no Christian parent, dying in poverty and 
distress, that those who owe to him their being may be led, 
and fed, and clothed, by Mr. Girard's bounty, at the expense 
of being excluded from all the means of religious instruction 
afforded to other children, and shut up through the most in- 
teresting period of their lives, in a seminary without religion, 
and with moral sentiments as cold as its own marble walls. 

I now come to the consideration of the second part of this clause 
in the will — that is to say, the reasons assigned by Mr. Girard for 
making these restrictions with regard to the ministers of religion: 
and I say that these are much more derogatory to Christianity 
than the main provision itself, excluding them. He says that 
there is such a multitude of sects and such diversity of opinion, 
that he will exclude all religion and all its ministers, in order to 
keep the minds of the children free from clashing controversies. 
Now, does notthistendto subvert all belief intheutility of teach- 
ing the Christian religion to youth at all ? Certainly, it is a 
broad and bold denial of such utility. To say that the evil 
resulting to youth from the differences of sects and creeds over- 
balances all the benefits whiclUhe best education can give them, 
what is this but to say, that the branches of the tree of religious 
knowledge are so twisted, and twined, and commingled, and all 



33 

run so much into and over each other, that there is therefore no 
remedy but to lay the axe to the root of the tree itself? It 
means that — and nothing more than that — and nothing less! 
Now, if there can be any thing more derogatory to the Christian 
religion than this, I should like to know what it is. In all this we 
see the attack upon religion itself, made on its ministers, its insti- 
tutions, and its diversities. And that is the objection urged by all 
the lower and more vulgar schools of infidelity throughout the 
world. In all these schools, called schools of Rationalism in 
Germany, Socialism in England, and by various other names in 
various countries which they infest, this is the universal cant. 
The first step of all these philosophical moralists, and regenera- 
tors of the human race, is to attack the agency through which 
religion and Christianuyare administered to man. But in this 
there is nothing new or original. We find the same mode of 
attack and remark in Paine's "Age of Reason." At page 336 
he says : " The Bramin, the follower of Zoroaster, the Jew, the 
Mahometan, the Church of Rome, the Greek Church, the 
Protestant Church, split into several hundred contradictory sec- 
taries, preaching, in some instances, damnation against each 
other, all cry out, < Our holy religion.' " 

And we rind the same in " Volney's Ruins of Empires." Mr. 
Volney arrays in a sort of semicircle the different and conflicting 
religions of the world. "And, first," says he, " surrounded by 
a group, in various fantastic dress, that confused mixture of 
violet, red, white, black, and speckled garments, with heads 
shaved, with tonsures, or with short hairs, with red hats, square 
bonnets, -pointed mitres, or long beards, is the standard of 
the Roman Pontiff. On his right, you see the Greek Pontiff, 
and on the left are the standards of two recent chiefs, (Luther 
and Calvin,) who, shaking off a yoke that had become tyran- 
nical, had raised altar against altar in their reform, and wrested 
half of Europe from the Pope. Behind these are the subal- 
tern seats, subdivided from the principal divisions. The Nes- 
torians, Eutycheans, Jacobites, Iconoclasts, Anabaptists, Pres- 
byterians, Wicklifntes, Oriandrians, Manicheans, Pretists, Ad- 
amites, the Contemplatives, the Quakers, the Weepers, and a 



34 

hundred others, all of distinct parties, persecuting when strong, 
tolerant when weak, hating each other in the name of the 
God of peace, forming such an exclusive heaven in a religion of 
universal charity, damning each other to pains without end in 
a future state, and realizing in this world the imaginary hell of 
the other." 

Can it be doubted for an instant that sentiments like these 
are derogatory to the Christian religion ? And yet on grounds 
and reasons exactly these — not like these — but exactly these — 
Mr. Girard founds his excuse for excluding Christianity and its 
ministers from his school. He is a tame copyist, and has only 
raised marble walls to perpetuate and disseminate the principles 
of Paine and of Volney. It has been said that Mr. Girard was 
in a difficulty — that he was the judge and disposer of his own 
property. We have nothing to do with his difficulties. It has 
been said that he must have done as he did do, because there 
could be no agreement, otherwise — agreement ? among whom? 
about what? He was at liberty to do what he pleased with 
his own. He had to consult no one as to what he should do 
in the matter. And if he had wished to establish such a chari- 
ty as might obtain the especial favor of the courts of law, he 
had only to frame it on principles not hostile to the religion 
of the country. 

But the learned gentleman went even farther than this, and 
to an extent that I regretted ; he said that there was as much 
dispute about the Bible as about any thing else in the world. 
No, thank God, that is not the case ! 

Binney. The disputes about the meaning of words and 
passages ! you will admit that ? 

Webster. Well, there is a dispute about the translation of 
certain words ; but if this be true, there is just as much dispute 
about it out of Mr. Girard's institution as there would be in it. 
And if this plan is to be advocated and sustained, why does not 
every man keep his children from attending all places of public 
worship until they are over eighteen years of age ? He says that 
a prudent parent keeps his child from the influence of sec- 
tarian doctrines — by which I suppose him to mean those tenets 



35 

that are opposed to his own. Well, I do not know but what that 
plan is as likely to make bigots as it is likely to make any 
thing else. I grant that the mind of youth should be kept 
pliant, and free from all undue and erroneous influences — that 
it should have as much play as is consistent with prudence ; 
but put it where it can obtain the elementary principles of re- 
ligious truth, at any rate— those broad and general precepts and 
principles whieh are admitted by all Christians. But here in this 
scheme of Mr. Girard, all sects and all creeds are denounced. 
And would not a prudent father rather send his child where 
he could get instruction under any form of the Christian religion 
than where he could get none at all? There are many instances 
of institutions, professing one leading creed, educating youths 
of dinerent sects. The Baptist College in Rhode Island re- 
ceives and educates youths of all religious sects and all beliefs. 
The colleges all over New England differ in certain minor 
points of belief, and yet that is held as no ground for exclud- 
ing the youth with other forms of belief, and other religious 
views and sentiments. So with the Methodists, and other de= 
nominations. 

But this objection to the multitude and differences o( sects 
is but the old story — the old infidel argument. It is notorious 
that there are certain great religious truths which are admitted 
and believed by all Christians. All believe in the existence 
of a God. All believe in the immortality of the soul. All 
believe in the responsibility, in another world, for our conduct 
in this. All believe in the divine authority of the New Testa- 
ment. Dr. Paley says that a single word from the New 
Testament shuts up the mouth of human questioning, and ex- 
cludes all human reasoning. And cannot all these great truths 
be taught to children without their minds being perplexed with 
clashing doctrines and sectarian controversies ? Most cer- 
tainly they can. 

And, to compare secular with religious matters, what would 
become of the organization of society, what would become of 
man as a social being, in connexion with the social system, if 



36 

we applied this mode of reasoning to him in his social rela- 
tions ? We have a constitutional Government, about the pow- 
ers, and limitations, and uses of which there is a vast amount 
of differences of belief. Your Honors have a body of laws, 
now before you, in relation to which differences of opinion, 
almost innumerable, are daily spread before the courts : in all 
these we see clashing doctrines and opinions advanced daily, to 
as great an extent as in the religious world. 

And apply the reasoning advanced by Mr. Girard to human 
institutions, and you will tear them all up by the root ; as you 
would inevitably tear all Divine institutions up by the root, if 
such reasoning is to prevail. At the meeting of the first Con- 
gress there was a doubt in the minds of many about the pro- 
priety of opening the session with prayer; and the reason as- 
signed was, as here, the great diversity of opinion and 
religious belief. Until at last Mr. Samuel Adams, with 
his gray hairs hanging about his shoulders, and with an im- 
pressive venerableness now seldom to be met with, (I suppose, 
owing to the difference of habits,) rose in that assembly, and 
with the air of a perfect Puritan, said it did not become men, pro - 
fessing to be Christian men, who had come together for solemn 
deliberation in the hour of their extremity, to say that there 
was so wide a difference in their religious belief, that they could 
not, as one man, bow the knee in prayer to the Almighty, 
whose advice and assistance they hoped to obtain. And In- 
dependent as he was, and an enemy to all prelacy as he was 
known to be, he moved that the Rev. Mr. Dushe, of the Epis- 
copal Church, should address the Throne of Grace in prayer. 
And John Adams, in his letter to his wife, says that he never 
saw a more moving spectacle. Mr. Dushe read the Episcopal 
service of the Church of England, and then, as if moved by 
the occasion, he broke out into extemporaneous prayer. And 
those men who were then about to resort to force to obtain 
their rights, were moved to tears ; and floods of tears, he says, ran 
down the cheeks of the pacific Quakers who formed part of that 
most interesting assembly. And depend upon it, that where 
there is a spirit of Christianity, there is a spirit which rises 



37 

above form, above ceremonies, independent of sect or creed? 
and the controversies of clashing doctrines. 

The consolations of religion cannot ever be administered to 
any of these sick and dying children in this college. But it is said 
that a poor dying child can be carried out beyond the walls of 
the school. He can be carried out to a hostelry, or hovel, and 
there receive those rites of the Christian religion which cannot 
be performed within those walls, even in his dying hour ! Is 
not all this shocking ? What a stricture is it upon this whole 
scheme ! What an utter condemnation ! A dying youth can- 
not receive religious solace within his seminary of learning ! 
But, it is asked, what could Mr. Girard have done? He 
could have done as has been done in Lombardy by the Em- 
peror of Austria — as my learned friend has informed us— 
where, on a large scale, the principle is established of teach- 
ing the elementary principles of the Christian religion, of 
enforcing human duties by divine obligations, and carefully 
abstaining in all cases from interfering with sects or the incul- 
cation of sectarian doctrines. How have they done in the 
schools of New England ? There the great elements of Chris= 
tiah truth are taught in every school, as far as I am acquainted 
with them. The Scriptures are read, their authority taught and 
enforced, their evidences explained, and prayers usually at- 
tended. 

The truth is, that those who really value Christianity, and 
believe in its importance, not only to the spiritual welfare of 
man, but to the safety and prosperity of human society, rejoice, 
that in its revelations and its teachings there is so much which 
mounts above controversy, and stands on universal acknow- 
ledgment. While many things about it are disputed, or are 
dark, they still plainly see its foundation, and its main pillars : 
and they behold in it a sacred structure, rising up to the 
heavens. They wish its general principles, and all its great 
truths, to be spread over the whole earth. But those who do 
not value Christianity, nor believe in its importance, to society 
or individuals, cavil about sects and schisms, and ring monoto- 
nous changes upon the shallow and so often refuted objections 



36 

founded on alleged variety of discordant creeds and clashing 
doctrines. 

I shall close this part of my argument by reading extracts 
from an English writer, one of the most profound thinkers of 
the age — a friend of reformation in the government and laws- 
John Foster, the friend and associate of Robert Hall. Look- 
ing forward to the abolition of the present dynasties of the old 
world, and desirous to see how the order and welfare of society 
is to be preserved in the absence of present conservative prin- 
ciples, he says : 

"Undoubtedly the zealous friends of popular education account knowledge valu- 
able absolutely, as being the apprehension of things as they are ; a prevention of 
delusions ; and so far a fitness for right volitions. 

" But they consider religion (besides being itself the primary and infinitely the most 
important part of knowledge) as a principle indispensable for securing the full ben- 
efit of all the rest. It is desired, and endeavored, that the understandings of these 
opening minds may be taken possession of by just and solemn ideas of their rela- 
tion to the Eternal Almighty Being ; that they may be taught to apprehend it as 
an awful reality ; that they are perpetually under His inspection ; and, as a certainty, 
that they must at length appear before Him in judgment, and find in another life 
the consequences of what they are in spirit and conduct here. It is to be impressed 
on them, that His will is the supreme law, that His declarations are the most mo- 
mentous truths known on earth ; and His favor and condemnation the greatest good 
and evil. Under an ascendency of this divine wisdom it is that their discipline in 
any other knowledge is designed to be conducted ; so that nothing in the mode of 
their instruction may have a tendency contrary to it, and every thing be taught in a 
manner recognising the relation with it, as far as shall consist with a natural un- 
forced way of keeping this relation in view. Thus it is sought to be secured, that 
as the pupil's mind grows stronger, and multiplies its resources, and he therefore 
has necessarily more power and means for what is wrong, they may be luminously 
presented to him, as if celestial eyes visibly beamed upon him, the most solemn 
ideas that can enforce what is right. 

" Such is the discipline meditated for preparing the subordinate classes to pursue 
their individual welfare, and act their part as members of the community. 

" All this is to be taught, in many instances, directly, in others by reference 
for conformation from the Holy Scriptures, from which authority will also be im- 
pressed, all the while, the principles of religion. And religion, while its grand con- 
cern is with the state of the soul towards God and eternal interests, yet takes every 
principle and rule of morals under its peremptory sanction j making the primary 
obligation and responsibility be towards God, of every thing that is a duty, with re- 
spect to men. 

"So that, with the subjects of this education, the source of propriety shall be 
conscience— the consideration of how they ought to be regulated in their conduct as a 



39 

part of the community, shall be the recollection that their Master in heaven dic- 
tates the laws of that conduct, and will judicially hold them amenable for every part 
of it. 

"And is it not a discipline thus addressed to the purpose of fixing religious prin- 
ciples in ascendency as far as that difficult object is within the power of discipline, 
and of infusing a salutary tincture of them into whatever else is taught, the right 
way to bring up citizens faithful to all that deserves fidelity in the social compact ? 

" Lay hold on the myriads of juvenile spirits before they have time to grow up, 
through ignorance, into a reckless hostility to social order; train them to sense and 
good morals ; inculcate the principles of religion, simply and solemnly, as religion — 
as a thing directly of divine dictation, and not as if its authority were chiefly in 
virtue of human institutions ; let the higher orders, generally, make it evident to 
the multitude that they are desirous to raise them in value, and promote their hap- 
piness, and then, whatever the demands of the people as a body, thus improving 
in understanding and sense of justice, shall come to be, and whatever modification 
their preponderance may ultimately enforce on the great social arrangements, it 
will be infallibly certain that there never can be a love of disorder, an insolent an- 
archy, a prevailing spirit of revenge and devastation. Such a conduct of the as- 
cendant ranks would, in this nation at least, secure that, as long as the world lasts, 
there never would be any formidable commotion or violent sudden changes. All 
those modifications of the national economy to which an improving people would 
aspire, and would deserve to obtain, would be gradually accomplished, in a man- 
ner by which no party would be wronged, and all would be the happier. " 

I not only read this for the excellence of its sentiments and 
their application to the subject, but because they are the results 
of the profound meditations of a man who is dealing with pop- 
ular ignorance. Desirous of, and expecting, a great change in 
the social system of the Old World, he is anxious to discover 
that conservative principle, by which society can be kept to- 
gether when crowns and mitres shall have no more influence. 
And he says that the only conservative principle must be and 
is, religion ! The authority of God ! His Revealed Will ! 
and the influence of the teaching of the ministers of Christi- 
anity ! 

Mr. Webster then stated that he would, on Monday, bring 
forward certain references and legal points bearing on this view 
of the case. 

The Court then adjourned. 



40 

8ECOND DAY. 

The seven Judges all took their seats precisely at 11 o'clock, 
and the Court was opened; but it was a quarter past 11 be- 
fore Mr. Webster arrived. 

Mr. Binney observed to the Court that he had omitted to 
notice, in his argument, that, in regard to the Statutes of UnU 
formity and Toleration in England, that, whilst the Jewish 
Talmuds for the propagation of Judaism alone were not sus- 
tained by those statutes, yet the Jewish Talmuds for the main- 
tenance of the poor were sustained thereby. And the deci- 
sions show that, where a gift had for its object the maintenance 
and education of poor Jewish children, the statutes sustained 
the devise. In proof of this, he quoted — 

First Ambler, by Blunt, p. 228, case of De Costa, &c. 
Also, the case of Jacobs & Gomperte, in the notes. 
Also, in the notes, 2d Swanston, p. 487, same case of De 
Costa, &c. 

Also, 7th Vesey, p. 423, case of Mo Catto vs. Lucardo. 
Also, Sheppard, p. 107. 
And Boyle, p. 43. 

Another case was that of a bequest given to an object 
abroad, and, in the decision, the Master of the Rolls considered 
that religious instruction was not a necessary part of education. 
See, also, the case of the Attorney General vs. the Dean and 
Canons of Christ Church. — Jacobs, p. 485. 

Mr. Binney then quoted from Noah Webster the definition 
of the word " tenets/' to show that Mr. Webster did not 
give the right definition when he said that tenets meant reli- 
gion. 

Mr. Webster then rose and said : The arguments of my 
learned friend, in relation to the Jewish laws as tolerated by 
the Statutes, go to maintain my very proposition, may it please 
your Honors. That is, that no school for the instruction of 
youth in any system which is any way derogatory to the 
Christian religion, or for the teaching of doctrines that are in 
any way contrary to the Christian religion, is or ever was re- 



41 

garded as a charity by the courts. It is true that the Statutes 
of Toleration regarded a devise for the maintenance of poor 
Jewish children, to give them food and raiment and lodging, 
as a charity. But a devise for the teaching of the Jewish re- 
ligion to poor children, that should come into the court of 
chancery, would not be regarded as a charity, or entitled to 
any peculiar privileges from the court. 

When I stated to your Honors, in the course of my argument 
on Saturday, that all denominations of Christians had some 
mode or provision for the appointment of teachers of Chris- 
tianity amongst them, I meant to have said something about 
the Quakers ; and, although we know that the teachers among 
them come into their office in a somewhat peculiar manner, 
yet there are preachers and teachers of Christianity provided 
in that peculiar body, notwithstanding its objection to the mode 
of appointing teachers and preachers by other Christian sects ; 
and the place or character of a Quaker preacher is an office 
and appointment as well known as is that of a preacher among 
any other denomination of Christians. 

I have heretofore argued to show that the Christian reli- 
gion — its general principles — must ever be regarded among us 
as the foundation of civil society. And I have thus far con- 
fined my remarks to the tendency and effect of the scheme of 
Mr. Girard (if carried out) upon the Christian religion. But I 
will go farther, and say that this school, this scheme or system, 
in its tendencies and effects, is opposed to all religions, of every 
kind. I will not now enter into a controversy with my learned 
friend about the definition of the word " tenets," being opinions 
or dogmas, or whatever you please. Religious tenets, I take 
it, and I suppose it will be generally conceded, mean religious 
opinions; and a youth that has arrived at the age of eighteen, 
who has no religious tenets, why then it is very plain that he 
has no religion. I do not care whether you call them dogmas, 
tenets, or opinions. If the youth does not entertain dogmas ? 
tenets, or opinions, or opinions, tenets, or dogmas, on religious 
subjects, then he has no religion at all. And it is idle to pre- 
tend that he has. And this strikes at a broader principle than 
6 



42 

when you merely look at this school in its effect upon Christi- 
anity alone. Now, we will suppose the case of a youth of 
eighteen, who has just left this school, and has gone through 
an education of philosophical morality, precisely in accordance 
with the views and expressed wishes of the donor. He comes 
then into the world to choose his religious tenets. The very next 
day, perhaps, after leaving school, he comes into a court of law 
to give testimony as a witness. Sir, I protest that by such a sys- 
tem he would be disfranchised. He is asked, "What is your reli- 
gion ?" His reply is, " Oh, I have not yet chosen any ; I am 
going to look round, and see which suits me best." He is 
asked, " Are you a Christian ?" He replies, " That involves 
religious tenets, and as yet I have not been allowed to enter- 
tain any." Again, " Do you believe in a future state of re- 
wards and punishments?" And he answers, " That involves 
sectarian controversies, which have carefully been kept from 
me." " Do you believe in the existence of a God ?" He an- 
swers, that there are clashing doctrines involved in these things, 
which he has been taught to have nothing to do with ; that 
the belief in the existence of a God, being one of the first ques- 
tions in religion, he is shortly about to think of that proposi- 
tion. Why, sir, it is vain to talk about the destructive tendency 
of such a system — to argue upon is to insult the understand- 
ing of every man ; it is mere, sheer, low, ribald, vul- 
gar Deism and infidelity ! [Here the effect was almost elec- 
tric, and some one broke out with applause, which was 
stopped.] It opposes all that is in Heaven, and all on earth, 
that is worth being on earth. It destroys the connecting link 
between the creature and the Creator ; it opposes that great 
system of universal benevolence and goodness that binds man 
to his Maker. No religion till he is eighteen ! What would 
be the condition of all your families — of all our children — if 
religious fathers and religious mothers were to teach their sons 
and daughters no religious tenets till they were eighteen ? 
What would become of their morals, their excellence, their 
purity of heart and life, their hope for time and eternity ! 
What would become of all those thousand ties of sweetness, 



43 

benevolence, love, and Christian feeling, that now render our 
young men and young maidens, like comely plants grow- 
ing up by a streamlet's side — the graces and the grace of 
opening manhood — of blossoming womanhood ? What would 
become of all that now renders the social circle lovely and be- 
loved ? What would become of society itself? How could it 
exist ? And is that to be considered a charity which strikes at 
the root of all this ; which subverts all the excellence and the 
charms of social life ; which tends to destroy the very founda- 
tion frame-work of society, both in its practices and in its 
opinions ? that subverts the whole decency, the whole moral- 
ity, as well as the whole Christianity and government of so- 
ciety ? No, sir ; no, sir ! 

And here let me turn to the consideration of the question, 
" What is an oath ?" I do not mean in the variety of defini- 
tions that may be given to it, as it existed and was practised 
in the time of the Romans, &c., but an oath as it exists at pres- 
ent in our courts of law ; as it is founded on a degree of con- 
sciousness that there is a Power above us that will reward our 
virtues or punish our vices. We all know that the doctrine of 
the English law is, that there must be in every person who en- 
ters court as a witness, be he Christian or Hindoo, there must 
be a firm conviction on his mind that falsehood or perjury will 
be punished, either in this world or the next, or he cannot be 
admitted as a witness. If he has not this belief, he is disfran- 
chised. In proof of this, I refer your Honors to the great case 
of Ormichund against Barker, in Lord Chief Justice Wills's re- 
port. There this doctrine is clearly laid down. But in no 
case, a man that has no belief in future rewards and punish- 
ments, for virtues or vices, is allowed to be a witness!, nor 
ought he to be. We hold life, liberty, and property, in this 
country, upon a system of oaths — oaths founded on a religious 
belief of some sort. And that system which would strike away 
the great substratum, destroy the safe possession of life, liber- 
ty, and property, destroy all the institutions of civil society, 
cannot and will not be considered as entitled to the protection 
of a court of equity. It has been said, on the other side, that 



44 

there was no teaching against religion or Christianity in this 
system. I deny it. The whole testament is one bold procla- 
mation against Christianity and religion of every creed. The 
children are to be brought up in the principles declared in that 
testament. They are to learn to be suspicious of Christianity 
and religion ; to keep clear of it, that the youthful heart may 
not become susceptible of the influences of Christianity or reli- 
gion in the slightest degree. They are to be told and taught 
that religion is not a matter for the heart or conscience, but 
for the decision of the cool judgment of mature years ; that at 
that period when the whole Christian world deem it most de- 
sirable to instil into the tender and comparatively pure mind 
and heart of the child, ere the cares and corruptions of the 
world have reached and seared it, the chastening influences of 
Christianity — at that period, the child in this college is to be 
carefully excluded therefrom, and to be told that its influence 
is pernicious and dangerous in the extreme. Why, the whole 
system is a constant preaching against Christianity and againsi 
religion: and I insist that there is no charity, and can be no char- 
ity, in that system of instruction from which Christianity is ex- 
cluded. I perfectly agree with what my learned friend says 
in regard to the monasteries of the old world, as seats of learn- 
ing, to which we are all indebted at the present day. Much 
of our literature — almost all of our early histories, and a vast 
amount of literary treasure, was preserved therein, and emana- 
ted therefrom. But we all know that, although these were 
emphatically receptacles for learning of the highest order, yet 
they were always connected with Christianity, and were al- 
ways conducted as schools of religious learning. 

Going back as far as the statutes of Henry IV, as early 
as 1402, (2d Pickering, p. 433,) in the act respecting charities, 
we find that one hundred years before the Reformation,in Catho- 
lic times, in the establishment of every charitable institution, 
there was to be proper provision for religious instruction. 
Again, after the time of the Reformation, when those monastic 
institutions were abolished, in the 1st Edward VI, ch. 14, we 
find certain chantries abolished, and their funds appropriated 



45 

to the instruction of youth, such as the grammar schools of that 
reign, which Lord Eldon says extended all over the kingdom j 
and in all these we find provisions for religious instruction, the 
dispensation of the same being by a teacher or preacher. In 
2d Swanston, p. 529, the case of the Bedford Charity, Lord 
Eldon gives a long opinion, in the course of which he says, that 
in these schools, care is taken to educate youth in the Christian 
religion, and in all of them the New Testament is taught, both 
in Latin and Greek. Here, then, we find that the great and 
leading provision, both before and after the Reformation, was 
to connect the knowledge of Christianity with human letters. 
And it will be always found, that a school for instruction of 
youth, to possess the privileges of a charity, must be provided 
with religious instruction. 

For the decision, that the essentials of Christianity are part 
of the common law of the land, I refer your Honors to 1st 
Vernon, p. 293, where Lord Hale, who cannot be suspected of 
any bigotry on this subject, says that, to decry religion, and 
call it a cheat, tends to destroy all religion ; and he also de- 
clares Christianity to be part of the common law of the land. 
So Mr. Dane, in his Abridgment, ch. 219, recognises the same 
principle. In 2d Strange, p. 834, case of the King against 
Wilson, the judges would not suffer it to be debated that writ- 
ing against religion generally was an offence at common law. 
They laid stress upon the word " genera] ly," because there 
might arise differences of opinion between religious writers on 
points of doctrines, and so forth. So in Taylor's case, 3d Mer- 
ivale, p. 405, by the High Court of Chancery, these doctrines 
were recognised and maintained. Also, 2d Burns's Ecclesias- 
tical Law, p. 95, Evans against the Chamberlain of London ; 
and in 2d Russell, p. 501, the Attorney General against the 
Earl of Mansfield. 

There is a case of recent date, which, if the English law is 
to prevail, would seem conclusive as to the character of this 
devise. It is the case of the Attorney General vs. Cullum 
1st vol. of Young and Collyer's Reports, p. 411. The case 
was heard and decided in 1842, by Sir Knight Bruce, Vice 



46 

Chancellor. The reporter's abstract, or summary, of the deci- 
sion is this : <' Courts of equity, in this country, will not 

SANCTION ANY SYSTEM OF EDUCATION IN WHICH RELIGION IS 
NOT INCLUDED. " 

The charity in question in that case, was established in the 
reign of Edward IV, for the benefit of the community and 
poor inhabitants of the town of Bury St. Edmunds. The ob- 
jects of the charity were various : for relief of prisoners, edu- 
cating and instructing poor people, for food and raiment for 
the aged and impotent, &c. There were uses, also, now 
deemed superstitious, such as praying for the souls of the dead. 
In this, and in other respects, the charity required revision, to 
suit it to the habits and requirements of modern times ; and a 
scheme was accordingly set forth for such revision by the mas- 
ter, under the direction of the court. By this scheme, there 
were to be schools, and these schools were to be closed on Sun- 
days, although the Scriptures were to be read daily on other 
days. This was objected to, and it was insisted, on the other 
hand, that the masters and mistresses of the schools should be 
members of the Church of England ; that they should, on 
every Lord's day, give instruction in the doctrines of the 
Church to those children whose parents might so desire ; but 
that all the scholars should be required to attend public wor- 
ship every Lord's day in the parish church, or other place of 
ivorship, according to their respective creeds. 

The Vice Chancellor said, that the term " education" was 
properly understood, by all the parties, to comprehend religious 
instruction ; that the objection to the scheme proposed by the 
master was not that it did not provide for religious instruction 
according to the doctrine of the Church of England, but that it 
did not provide for religious instruction at all. In the course 
of the hearing, the Vice Chancellor said, that any scheme of 
education, without religion, would be worse than a mockery. 
The parties afterwards agreed, that the masters and mistresses 
should be members of the Church of England; that every 
school day the master should give religious instruction, during 
one hour, to all the scholars — such religious instruction to be 



47 

confined to the reading and explanation of the Scriptures ; 
that on every Lord's day he should give instruction in the 
liturgy, catechism, and articles of the Church of England, and 
that the scholars should attend church every Lord's day, un- 
less they were children of persons not in communion with the 
Church of England. 

In giving the sanction of the court to this arrangement, the 
Vice Chancellor said, that he wished to have it distinctly un- 
derstood that the ground on which he had proceeded was not 
a preference of one form of religion to another, but the neces- 
sity, if the matter was left to him judicially, to adopt the course 
of requiring the teachers to be members of the Church of 
England. 

This case clearly shows, that, at the present day, a school, 
founded by a charity, for the instruction of children, cannot be 
sanctioned by the courts as a charity, unless the scheme of edu- 
cation includes religious instruction. It shows, too, that this 
general requisition of the law is independent of the church es- 
tablishment, and that it is not religion in any particular form, 
but religion — religious and Christian instruction in some form — 
which is holden to be indispensable. 

It cannot be doubted how a charity for the instruction of 
children would fare in an English court, the scheme of which 
should carefully and sedulously exclude all religious or Chris- 
tian instruction, and profess to establish morals on principles no 
higher than those of enlightened Paganism. 

Enough, then, your Honors, has been said on this point ; and 
I am willing that inquiry should be prosecuted to any extent 
of research to controvert this position — that a school of educa- 
tion for the young, which rejects the Christian religion, cannot 
be sustained as a charity, so as to entitle it to come before the 
courts of equity for the privileges which they have power to 
confer on charitable bequests. 

Mr. Webster then replied to the remarks of Mr. Binney,ui 
relation to the Liverpool Blue Coat School, and read from the 
report of Mr. Bache on education in Europe, Mr. Bache having 
been sent abroad by the city of Philadelphia, to investigate this 
whole matter of education. 



48 

Mr. Webster. If Mr. Girard had established such a school 
as that, it would have been free from all those objections that 
have been raised against it. This Liverpool Blue Coat School, 
though partially too much of a religious party character, is 
strictly a church establishment. It is a school established on a 
peculiar foundation — that of the Madras system of Dr. Bell. 
It is a monitorial school ; those who are advanced in learning 
are to teach the others in religion, as well as secular know- 
ledge. It is strictly a religious school, and the only objection 
is, that it is too much confined, in its instruction, to a particular 
sect. 

Mr. Binney observed that there was no provision made for 
clergymen. 

Mr. Webster. That is true, because the scheme of the 
school is monitorial, in which the more advanced scholars in- 
struct the others. But religious instruction is amply and par- 
ticularly provided for. 

Mr. Webster then referred to Shelford, p. 105, and onward, 
under the head " Jews/' in the fourth paragraph, where, he 
stated, that the whole matter, and all the cases, as regarded the 
condition and position of the Jews, as respected various chari- 
ties, were given in full. 

He then referred to the Smithsonian legacy, which had been 
mentioned, and which he said was no charity at all, nor any 
thing like a charity. It was a gift to Congress, to be disposed 
of as Congress saw fit, for scientific purposes. 

He then replied, in a few words, to the arguments of Mr. 
Binney in relation to the University of Virginia ; and said 
that, although there was no provision for religious instruction 
in that University, yet he supposed it would not be contended 
for a moment that the University of Virginia was a charity, or 
that it came before the courts claiming of the law of that State 
protection as such. It stood on its charter. 

Mr. Webster. I repeat again, before closing this part of 
my argument, the proposition — important as I believe it to be — 
for your Honors' consideration, that the proposed school, in its 



49 

just character, objects, and tendencies, is derogatory to Chris- 
tianity and religion I And if it be so, then I maintain that it 
cannot be considered a charity, and as such entitled to the just 
protection and support of a court of equity. I consider this 
the great question for the consideration of this Court. I may 
be excused for pressing it on the attention of your Honors. It 
is one which, in its decision, is to influence the happiness, the 
temporal and the eternal welfare, of one hundred millions of 
human beings,alive and to be born,in this*land! Its decision will 
give a hue to the apparent character of our institutions ; it will be a 
comment on their spirit to the whole Christian world ! I again 
press the question to your Honors — "Is a clear, plain, posi- 
tive system for the instruction of children, founded on clear 
and plain objects of infidelity, a charity in the eye of the law, 
and as such entitled to the privileges awarded to charities in a 
court of equity ?" And with th»is, I leave this part of the case, 

THIRD DAY. 

I shall now, may it please your Honors, proceed to inquire 
whether there is, in the State of Pennsylvania, any settled pub- 
lic policy to which this school, as planned by Mr. Girard in his 
will, is in opposition ; for it follows, that if there be any set- 
tled public policy in the laws of Pennsylvania on this subject, 
then any school, or scheme, or system, which tends to subvert 
this public policy, cannot be entitled to the protection of a 
court of equity. It will not be denied that there is a gen- 
eral public policy in that as in all States, drawn from its history 
and its laws, And it will not be denied, that any scheme or 
school of education which directly opposes this is not to be 
favored by the courts. Pennsylvania is a free and independ- 
ent State. She has a popular government — a system of trial 
by jury, of free suffrage, of vote by ballot, of alienability of 
property. All these form part of the general public policy of 
Pennsylvania. Any man who shall go into that State can 
speak and write as much as he pleases against a popular form 
of government, freedom of suffrage, trial by jury, and against 
7 



50 

any or all of these that I have named ; he may decry civil 
liberty, and assert the divine right of Kings, and still he does 
nothing criminal; but if, to give success to such efforts, 
special power from a court of justice is required, it will not 
be given. There is not one of these features of the gen- 
eral public policy of Pennsylvania, but what a school 
might be established, and preachers and teachers employ- 
ed to teach against. That might in a certain sense be con- 
sidered a school of education, but it would not be a charity. 
And if Mr. Girard, in his lifetime, had founded schools, and 
employed teachers to preach and teach in favor of infidelity, 
or against popular government, free suffrage, trial by jury, or 
the alienability of property, there was nothing to stop him, or 
prevent him from so doing. But where any one or all of these 
come to be provided for a school or system as a charity, and 
come before the courts for favor, then in neither one, nor all, 
nor any, can they be favored, because they are opposed to the 
general public policy and public law of the State. 

These great principles have always been recognised ; and 
these are no more parts and parcels of the public law of Penn- 
sylvania than is the Christian religion. We have in the char- 
ter of Pennsylvania, as prepared by its great founder, William 
Penn — we have in his "great law," as it was called, the 
declaration — that the preservation of Christianity is one of 
the great and leading ends of government. This is de- 
clared in the charter of the State. Then the laws of Penn- 
sylvania — the statutes against blasphemy, the violation of the 
Lord's day, and others to the same effect, proceed on this 
great, broad principle, that the preservation of Christianity 
is one of the great ends of government. This is the general 
public policy of Pennsylvania. On this head we have the case 
of Updegraffe against the Commonwealth, 11th Sargent & 
Rawle, page 394; in which a decision in accordance with this 
whole doctrine was given by the Supreme Court of Pennsyl- 
vania, The solemn opinion pronounced by that tribunal 



51 

begins by a general declaration that Christianity is and has 
always been part of the common law of Pennsylvania.* 

I have said, your Honors, that our system of oaths in all our 
courts, by which we hold liberty and property, and all our 
rights, are founded on or rest on Christianity and a religious 
belief. So does the affirmation of Quakers — that rests on re- 
ligious scruples drawn from the same source, the same feeling 
of religious responsibility. 

The courts of Pennsylvania have themselves decided that a 
charitable bequest, which counteracts the public policy of the 
State, cannot be sustained. This was so ruled in the often cited 
case of the Methodist Church against Remington. There, the 
devise was to the Methodist Church generally, extending through 
the States and into Canada, and the trust was declared void on 
this account alone, viz : that it was inconsistent with the public 
policy of the State — inconsistent with the general spirit of the 
laws of Pennsylvania. But is there any comparison to be 
made between that ground on which a devise to a church is 
declared void — viz: as inconsistent with the public policy of 
the State — and the case of a devise which undermines and op- 
poses the whole Christian religion, and derides all its ministers ? 
The one tending to destroy all religion, and the other being 
merely against the spirit of the legislation and laws of the State, 
and the general public policy of Government, in a very subor- 
dinate matter. Can it be shown that this devise of a piece of 
ground to the Methodist church can be properly set aside, and 
declared void on general grounds, and not be shown that such 
a devise as that of Mr. Girard which tends to overturn as well 
as oppose the public policy and laws of Pennsylvania, can also 
be set aside ? 

Sir, there are many other American cases which I could 
cite to the Court in support of this point of the case. I will 
now only refer to 8 Johnson, page 291. 

It is the same in Pennsylvania as elsewhere — the general 
principles and public policy are sometimes established by con- 

* Vide Appendix, No. 2. 



52 

stitutional provisions — sometimes by legislative enactments— 
sometimes by judicial decisions, and sometimes by general con- 
sent. But how, or when it may be established, there is no- 
thing that we look for with more certainty than this general 
principle, that Christianity is part of the law of the land. This 
was the case among the Puritans of England, the Episcopa~ 
lians of the Southern States, the Pennsylvania Quakers, the 
Baptists, the mass of the followers of Whitefield and Wesley 
and the Presbyterians — all — all brought and all adopted this 
great truth—and all have sustained it. And where there 
is any religious sentiment amongst men at all, this senti- 
ment incorporates itself with the law. Every thing declares 
it / The massive Cathedral of the Catholic ; the Episcopalian 
Church, with its lofty spire pointing heavenward ; the plain 
temple of the Quaker; the log church of the hardy pioneer of 
the wilderness ; the mementosand memorials around and about 
us— the grave yards — their tombstones and epitaphs — their 
silent vaults — their mouldering contents — all attest it. The 
dead prove it as well as the living I The generation that is gone 
before speak to it, and pronounce it from the tomb ! We feel it I 
All, all, proclaim that Christianity— general, tolerant Chris- 
tianity—Christianity independent of sects and parties — that 
Christianity to which the sword and the fagot are unknown — 
general, tolerant Christianity, is the law of the land ! 

Mr. Webster, having gone over the other points in the 
case, which were of a more technical character, in conclusion, 
said : 

/ take leave of this cause ! [Great sensation !] I look for 
no good whatever from the establishment of this school — this 
college — this scheme — this experiment of an education in 
u practical morality/' unblessed with the influences of reli- 
gion ! It sometimes happens to man to attain for good, by 
accident, that which he could not achieve by long-continued 
exercise of industry and ability. And it is said, even of the 
skilful and the man of genius, that, by accident, he will some- 
times " snatch a grace beyond the reach of art." 

And I believe that men sometimes do mischief, not only be- 



53 

yond their intent, but beyond the ordinary scope of their 
talents and ability. In my opinion, if Mr. Girard had given 
years to the study of a mode by which he could dispose of his 
vast fortune so that no good could arise to the general cause of 
charity — no good to the general cause of learning— no good to 
human society — and which should be most productive of pro- 
tracted struggles, troubles, and difficulties, in the popular 
councils of a great city, he could not so effectually have at- 
tained that result as he has by this devise now before the 
Court. It is not the result of good fortunes, but of bad for- 
tunes, which have over-ridden and cast down whatever of 
good might have been accomplished by a different disposition, 
I believe that this plan — this scheme — was unblessed in all 
its purposes, and in all its original plans ! Unwise in all 
its frame and theory, while it lives, it will lead an annoyed 
and troubled life, and leave an unblessed memory when it 
dies ! If I could persuade myself that this Court would come 
to such a decision as, in my opinion, the public good and the 
law require, and if I could believe that any humble efforts of 
my own had contributed in the least to lead to such a result^ 
I should deem it the crowning mercy of my professional life. 

[Mr. Webster spoke this day for an hour and a half, and 
for seven hours and a half on the two preceding days. Imme- 
diately after he concluded, all the ladies rose and left the Court 
in a body, and it was ten minutes before order could be re- 
stored.] 



APPENDIX. 



No. 1. 

Extract from the writings of Bishop White. 

The will goes to the extent of the. abandonment of religion, as prescribing the 
rules of human conduct. If a collection of youth may have their attention ex- 
clusively directed to other motives, no reason can be given why they may not be 
surrendered to the same through life. If the instructed are forbidden to call the 
attention of their pupils to the Author of all the wonders which open on their senses; 
and to a state succeeding that which, as they must soon discover, will be ended by 
the grave — and certainly silence on these and on the like subjects is exacted by the 
terms of the bequest; and if the prescribed rule of life be sufficient until the age of 
fourteen or fifteen, or even of eighteen, long before which there will be felt the 
struggles between inclination and the sense of duty; the sufficiency of the same rule 
for the remainder of life is an obvious consequence. 

The error of Mr. Girard's restrictions is evident in the principle on which it is 
founded — the diversity of sentiment on subjects of religion. Let the principle be 
tested in application to the relations of domestic life. No wise head of a family 
withholds instruction from his children On the reciprocal duties of parent and 
child, and of the parties to a marriage contract. Yet how many shades of differ- 
ence of opinion are there as to the proper extent of parental power, and to that of 
the correspondent obedience of the child } Similar diversities prevail as to the other 
relations. Is sage instruction to be delayed on these accounts ? 

The like remark may be made on the subject of civil rulers, and of the allegiance 
due from the citizen or subject. What a wide field is open by the claims of power 
in the hands of a single person, or in those of a few, or in an aristocracy, or in a 
popular assembly, or in some one of the many mixed ibrms which have been either 
adopted or imagined ! According to the reasoning of the will, all determination 
should be deferred to the ages of fourteen or fifteen, or perhaps eighteen ; yet, in 
disregard of such laxity, every good citizen instils into the minds of his offspring 
sentiments which sustain the rights of those who govern, and exact obedience with- 
in the limits of the laws. 

The present writer has a very Umited acquaintance with the gentlemen who com- 
pose the respectable bodies of our city councils. He supposes of the most, and 
thinks it probable of all of them, that they confess the claims of religion, by de- 
nominating themselves as belonging, each of them, to one or to another of the 
religious societies within the bounds of the city. He therefore, with great respect, 
submits to their understandings how far they can, with clear consciences, undertake 
the government of a seminary which discharges its pupils from all regard to religious 



56 

obligation, and from all subjection to religious discipline. They cannot but be 
aware of the contrariety of so ungodly a regimen to those Holy Scriptures which 
they make the foundation of their several creeds. In the Old Testament they read — 
"bring up a child in the way in which he should go," They cannot be ignorant 
of what the Jewish lawgiver says concerning the laws of God — " thou shalt dili- 
gently teach them to thy children, and thou shalt talk of them when thou sittest in 
thy house, and when thou waikest by the way, and when thou liest down, and 
when thou risest up." And, if moral cultivation be a part of the plan of any 
literary institution, it cannot be beyond the reach of the caution — "the fear of the 
Lord is the beginning of wisdom." The calls of the New Testament are in unison 
with those of the Old — "ye parents, bring up your children in the nurture and 
admonition of the Lord;" "children, obey your parents in the Lord;" and, "I 
write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father." Very differ- 
ent are these and the like provisions from the delay of even the mention of such 
sanctions of duty to young men under the ages of fourteen or fifteen, or towards 
eighteen; whatever need there may be seen of them in the increasing strength of 
their passions and of their appetites. 

Let there be attention to the operation of the bequest in its occasional violation of 
the tenderest feelings of the parental breast. We will suppose four religious men — 
an Episcopalian, a Presbyterian, a Baptist, and a Methodist — in circumstances barely 
competent to the subsistence of their families. Let them perceive themselves de- 
parting this life, without provision for the support and the education of their children j 
and no other guardianship over them to be relied on, beside that of certain function- 
aries of the city, wisely provided for the object. These guardians may judge the 
binding of them to reputable tradesmen to have less prospect of advantage than the 
entering of them into the contemplated receptacle of orphans. According to the 
character of the supposed dying men, notwithstanding the diversities of their opinion* 
on various points, they would be the same in the design, had their lives been spared, 
of giving a religious education to their children; whose deaths they would deem a 
less calamity than their being thrown on a world of temptation at the age of four- 
teen, or of fifteen, or of eighteen, without the knowledge of God or of a future state, 
or of those Scriptures which, in the parental estimate, are necessary to their being 
made "wise unto salvation." A great proportion of the children of the poor are 
disposed of under a guardianship created by the laws. This will probably be the 
principal source of supply to a seminary in which the sound of the voice of religion 
is never to reach the ears of the juvenile inmates. 

It would be unjust to the memory of Mr. Girard not to notice his remarking it as 
a privilege of his orphans, on their arrival at the age for the leaving of the seminary, 
to adopt such tenets as their matured reason may enable them to prefer. It is not 
to the purpose to inquire how far this privilege, which his protegees will derive from 
the laws of the land, may be supposed to add to or enforce the moral education 
which they may have brought with them from the seminary. Whatever may have 
been, or may not have been, the wishes of the testator to this point; and whatever 
effect our favorable construing of his views may have on our estimate of bis own 



57 

character, it is all foreign to the present argument, which tends to the two positions, 
that it is irreligious and unchristian to accept of the public responsibility of an in- 
stitution, to the pupils of which there shall be denied all instruction in religion; and 
that if other motives are sufficient for their government until their arrival at the ages 
of fourteen and fifteen and eighteen, no reason can be given why they may not be 
sufficient through the remainder of life. 

Perhaps there may seem an interference of the argument with a prejudice not 
uncommon, that the minds of the secluded orphans would be sensible of impressions 
made on them by nature of the being of God, and of their responsibility to his 
tribunal. This is the exploded doctrine of innate ideas. If there be any not yet 
reached by what has been written on the subject by John Locke, they may be re- 
ferred to the observations lately made on those born deaf and dumb ; who know 
nothing of the primary truths of religion, until taught through the medium of the 
expedients brought into operation for that unfortunate class of the human family. 
Whether the design of Mr. Girard can be strictly executed, may be considered ae a 
problem. Should this be the case, his orphans will leave the seat of their juvenile 
residence as void of any trace of a knowledge of the Deity, as some who might be 
shown to him in an institution which in his will he has properly distinguished by a 
munificent donation. 

It is required that for admission the orphan shall be between six and ten years of 
age. Doubtless, within those terms, there are sometimes salutary impressions on 
infant minds. Where this has been the case, it is not probable that a single trace 
of them will remain through years, in a sphere so unfavorable to their cultivation. 

It may be anticipated as very unlikely, that for the intended seminary there will 
be obtained, even if it should be thought desirable, instructers who are believers in 
the Christian religion, and who have its interests at heart. Were this possible, it 
is easy to perceive the painful circumstances in which such instructers must some- 
times find themselves. Let an instructer be supposed taking a walk with one of the 
pupils, on some fine morning during the renewal of the herbage of the year. Let 
there arise in the mind of the former some such passage as the address to the Deity, 
in Adam's Morning Hymn, in Milton — "These are thy wondrous works, Parent 
of good ! Almighty, &c." The instructer, warmed by the theme and the sur- 
rounding scene, might be tempted to break out in such an act of adoration. But 
it would be unfaithfulness to his trust, and he must keep it a secret from his pupil 
that he believes in the existence of such a being. The supposition might be diver- 
sified by a great variety of cases, sufficient to show that, under the provisions of the 
will, there will be an interdict of Christian instructers, whether designed or not, as 
well as of Christian teaching, within the walls. 

That there will be the supply of teachers of a very different description, may be 
counted on; and modern times have multiplied those pests of society who, under the 
profession of schoolmasters, lose no opportunities of infusing their poison of infi- 
delity into unsuspicious minds. Such instructers have no authority, under the will, 
to go beyond the lessons of mere morality; so as to teach any doctrine of absolute 
irreligion, from the highest point of Atheism to the most specious of all the ex- 
pedients for the misrepresentation of any of the contents of Holy Scripture. But 
8 



58 

no one, acquainted with human nature, will believe that such instructers, in teach- 
ing, will find reluctance to the guarding of their pupils against the religious truths 
which will be addressed to them on their entrance into social life, resolving what 
they will hear into popular fable and superstition, which it is now high time to lay 
aside. 

From the tenor of the argument, there will have been anticipated the opinion of 
what should be expected from city councils. It is, that there should be a respectful 
but determined rejection of the trust intended to be instituted by the will of Stephen 
Girard, Esq., for the maintaining and the educating of orphans. 

It is a great sacrifice, but it cannot be too great, when the acceptance of it would 
be an acknowledgment that religion, even in its simplest forms, is unnecessary to 
the binding of men to their various duties. As yet, no such theory has shown its 
face in the proceedings of any of the constituted authorities of the United States. 
If the breaking of this unholy ground should be a corporate act of our city councife, 
there will be apprehended from it the most disastrous consequences, by 

A CITIZEN OF PHILADELPHIA. 



No. 2. 

Extract from the judgment of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania^ in the case 
of Updegraffe vs. the Commonwealth. 

Christianity, general Christianity, is, and always has been, a part of the com* 
mon law of Pennsylvania ; Christianity, without the spiritual artillery of European 
countries 5 for this Christianity was one of the considerations of the royal charter, 
and the very basis of its great founder, William Penn ; not Christianity founded en any 
particular religious tenets ; not Christianity with an established church, and tithes, 
and spiritual courts ; but Christianity with liberty of conscience to all men. Wil- 
liam Penn and Lord Baltimore were the first legislators who passed laws in favor 
of liberty of conscience ; for before that period the principle of liberty of conscience 
appeared in the laws of no people, the axiom of no government, the institutes of 
no society, and scarcely in the temper of any man. Even the reformers were as 
furious against contumacious errors as they were loud in asserting the liberty of 
conscience. And to the wilds of America, peopled by a stock cut off by persecu- 
tion from a Christian society, does Christianity owe true freedom of religious opin- 
ion and religious worship. 

From the time of Bracton, Christianity has been received as a part of the common 
law of England. I will not go back to remote periods, but state a series of promi- 
nent decisions, in which the doctrine is to be found. 

In the case of the King vs. Woolaston — 2Stra.,844; Fitzg., 64; Raymond, 162 — 
the defendant had been convicted of publishing five libels, ridiculing the miracles 
of Jesus Christ, his life and conversation, and was moved in arrest of judgment 
that this offence was not punishable in the temporal courts ; but the court said they 
would not suffer it to be debated M whether to write against Christianity generally 



59 

was not an offence of temporal cognizance." It was further contended that it was 
merely to show that those miracles were not to be taken in a literal but allegor- 
ical sense, and, therefore, the book could not be aimed at Christianity in general, 
but merely attacking one proof of the Divine mission. But the court said the main 
design of the book, though professing to establish Christianity upon a true bottom, 
considers the narrations of Scripture as explanative and prophetical, yet that these 
professions could not be credited, and the rule is, allegatio contra factum non est 
admittendum. In that case the court laid great stress on the term general, and 
did not intend to include disputes between learned men on particular and contro- 
verted points ; and Lord Chief Justice Raymond, Fitzg., 66, said : "I would have 
it taken notice of, that we do not meddle with the difference of opinion, and that 
we interfere only where the root of Christianity is struck at." 

In the justly admired speech of Lord Mansfield, in a case which made much 
noise at the time — Evens vs. Chamberlain, of London, Furneaux's Letters to Sir 
W. Blackstone, Appx. to Black. Com., and 2 Burns's Eccles. Law, p. 95 — con- 
science, he observed, is not controllable by human laws, nor amenable to human 
tribunals ; persecution, or attempts to force conscience, will never produce convic- 
tion, and were only calculated to make hypocrites or martyrs. There never was a 
single instance, from the Saxon times down to our own, in which a man was pun- 
ished for erroneous opinions. For Atheism, blasphemy, and reviling the Christian 
religion, there have been instances of prosecution at the common law, but bare 
non-conformity is no sin by the common law, and all pains and penalties for non- 
conformity to the established rites and modes are repealed by the acts of toleration, 
and dissenters exempted from ecclesiastical censuses. What bloodshed and confu- 
sion have been occasioned, from the reign of Henry IV, when the first penal stat- 
utes were enacted, down to the Revolution, by laws made to force conscience. 
There is certainly nothing more unreasonable, nor inconsistent with the rights of 
human nature, more contrary to the spirit and precepts of the Christian religion, 
more iniquitous and unjust, more impolitic, than persecution against natural reli- 
gion, revealed religion, and sound policy. The great, and wise, and learned 
judge, observes : "The true principles of natural religion are part of the common 
law ; the essential principles of revealed religion are part of the common law ; 
so that a person vilifying, subverting, or ridiculing them, may be prosecuted at 
common law ; but temporal punishments ought not to be inflicted for mere opin- 
ions." Long before this, much suffering, and a mind of strong and liberal cast, 
had taught this sound doctrine and this Christian precept to William Penn. The 
charter of Charles II recites, that " Whereas our trusty and beloved William Penn, 
out of a commendable desire to enlarge our English empire, as also to reduce the 
savages, by gentle and just measures, to the love of civil society and the Christian 
religion, hath humbly besought our leave to translate a colony," &c. The first 
legislative act in the colony was. the recognition of the Christian religion, and es- 
tablishment of liberty of conscience. Before this, in 1646, Lord Baltimore passed 
a law in Maryland in favor of religious freedom ; and it is a memorable fact, that 
of the first legislators who established religious freedom, one was a Roman Catho- 
lic and the other a Friend. It is called the great law of the body of laws in ths 



60 

province of Penney lvania, passed at an assembly at Chester, the 7th of the 12th 
month, December. After the following preamble and declaration, viz : " Where- 
as the glory of Almighty God, and the good of mankind, is the reason and end of 
government, and therefore government in itself is a venerable ordinance of God, and 
forasmuch as it is principally desired and intended by the proprietary and Governor 
and the freemen of the province of Pennsylvania and territories thereunto belonging, 
to make and establish such laws as shall best preserve true Christian and mil liberty, 
in opposition to all unchristian, licentions, and unjust practices, whereby God may 
have his due, Caesar his due, and the people their due, from tyranny and oppres- 
sion on the one side, and insolency and licentiousness on the other, so that the best 
and firmest foundation may be laid for the present and future happiness both of the 
Governor and people of this province and territories aforesaid, and their posterity" — 
[Then follow enactments against profanity, blasphemy, and violation of the Lord's 
day.] 

Amidst the concurrent testimony of political and philosophical writers among the 
Pagans, in the most absolute state of democratic freedom, the sentiments of Plu- 
tarch on this subject are too remarkable to be omitted. After reciting that the first 
and greatest care of the legislators of Rome, Athens, Lacedaemon, and Greece in 
general, was, by instituting solemn supplications and forms of oaths, to inspire 
them with a sense of the favor or displeasure of Heaven, that learned historian 
declares, that we have met with towns unfortified, illiterate, and without the con- 
veniences of habitations, but a people wholly without religion no traveller hath yet 
seen ; and a city might as well be erected in the air as a State be made to unite 
where no divine worship is attended. Religion he terms the cement of civil union, 
and the essential support of legislation. No free government now exists in the 
world, unless where Christianity is acknowledged, and is the religion of the coun- 
try. So far from Christianity, as the counsel contends, being part of the machinery 
necessary to despotism, the reverse is the fact. Christianity is part of the common 
law of this State. It is not proclaimed by the commanding voice of any human 
superior, but expressed in the calm and mild accents of customary law. Its found- 
ations are broad, and strong, and deep ; they are laid in the authority, the inter- 
est, the affections of the people. Waiving all questions of hereafter, it is the 
purest system of morality, the firmest auxiliary, and only stable support of all 
human laws. It is impossible to administer the laws without taking the religion 
which the defendant in error has scoffed at, that Scripture which he has reviled, as 
their basis ; to lay aside these is at least to weaken the confidence in human vera- 
city, so essential to the purposes of society, and without which no question of 
property could be decided, and no criminal brought to justice ; an oath in the com- 
mon form, on a discredited book, would be a most idle ceremony. 



! 






^l 298 £00 




ssaaoNoo 



JOAavaan 



? : fl&*^k, 



^^m 









■ 






